Delta Cooling Towers Inc: Fill & Download for Free

To be honest, I much prefer Guangzhou to Beijing or Shanghai. Guangzhou feels more laid back, and unpretentious. But mostly because of the food.I resolutely vote for the fact that Dian Xin should receive status as a world wonder. Who wants to argue with me?As for travel in GZ, the city is easy to navigate, the metro gets you everywhere, and it's cheap. Yet for first time visitors they always get muddled with the different lines and connections around the Tianhe area. During trade fair season it’s always funny to watch the confusion about which line to get on to get to Pazhou from GZ East.The scale of the Canton Fair complex is staggering.The city has its own share of unique modern architecture, such as the Langham hotel which perhaps is not that beautiful, but definitely eye catching.The Canton Tower is certainly a beautyThe GZ Opera House is another architectural wonder, you’ll either love it , hate it or be bemused by it. It's a kinda interesting building thats slightly hypnotic in that you're not really sure from which point to look at it.GZ has China’s largest amusement park, Chimelong Paradise, I didn't go inside the amusement park, being fat and lazy, I went to the adjacent Safari Park, aka Zoo, and enjoyed strolling around admiring monkeys, giraffe, tigers, snakes, birds and all sorts inc. Pandas which seem to have a similar outlook on life to myself, eat and laze, repeat.Shangxiajiu Pedestrian Street is lively and vibrant, not much there for shopping that suits me, but awesome place for snacks and people watching.GZ has plenty of historical sites such as Chen Clan Academy, Nanyue King’s Tomb, Temple of the Six Banyan Trees and much more.Guangzhou is huge, the city itself is quite large but when you take into account that Guangzhou includes the sub districts of Conghua through to Nansha, it’s massive! Some 25 million people massive, that’s more than the population of my home country Australia.Then, consider that soon, Guangzhou will be part of the mega-city (my definition) being the Greater Bay Area which will include Hong Kong, Shenzhen, Dongguan, Zhaoqing, Foshan, and Macau. Which lifts that population figure to some 60 million!The weather is pleasant, being a temperate area its quite comfortable all year round. And a big bonus is that it does not suffer from pollution like its northern counterparts.Back to the important stuff, food.In GZ you’ll be spoilt for choice in terms of high quality low cost dian xin restaurants that will leave Hong Kong red faced, if that's not enough don't worry, the food options never stop.Changfen is an all-time daily favorite. Siu mei is everywhere with roasted geese and BBQ pork hanging from hooks behind glass windows at seemingly every street corner. Congee, whilst a simple staple, is nowhere to be had better than in GZ. Soups, this is the place for health giving nourishing soups. Another must try daily staple is wonton soup.More? There’s always more to eat in Guangzhou, it never ends. Head to snack street, Shangxiajiu, and try out wife cake, moon cake (at the right time of year), red bean soup, black fried tofu (not for me, hahaha), wrapped duck, blood jelly, and offal soup thing that I forget the name, but super nutritious.More, of course, there is more. There’s a large foreign community so you can find really high quality Italian and Turkish cuisines here. Head to Xingsheng Road, Zhujiang New Town area and you’ll find a cluster of western restaurants and cafes. Some of the Turkish restaurants here are A1.More about Guangzhou and GuangdongGuangzhou - WikipediaOfficial Information Website of Guangdong Provincial Tourism AdministrationWelcome to Guangzhou [inc. Top Ten Things to Do, Eat, and Where to Stay]Guangzhou - WikitravelGuangdong News, Pearl River Delta, Canton FairGuangzhou is also a great base for exploring outlying natural attractions, such as at nearby Qingyuan, Shaoguan, Dinghu, and Zhaoqing. Theres hot spring resorts in Conghua apparently. Foshan is only a metro ride away and features a few historical attractions. Nansha bay looks like it could be an interesting area for boating enthusiasts but I am yet to go there, so I don't know if it is still in planning or not.Yeah, Guangzhou is kinda cool.

There are numerous errors, miscalculations, omissions and other known discrepancies in the NIST 911 report. We’ll address 15 of them, or so, depending on my time, with references, but there are well over 2 dozen.OMISSION OF GIRDER STIFFENERS SHOWN ON FRANKEL DRAWING:1. NIST maintains that WTC 7 collapsed due to fire acting upon the 13th floor A2001 girder between columns 79 and 44 and the beams framing into it from the east. They said that the beams expanded by 5.5” (revised in June 2012 to 6.25”), broke the girder erection bolts, and pushed this girder off its column 79 seat. This girder fell to floor 12, which then precipitated a cascade of floor failures from floor 12 down to floor 5, and column 79 then became unsupported laterally causing it to buckle. It is then said that column 79's buckling caused the upper floors to cascade down, which started a chain reaction — a north-to-south then east-to-west horizontal, progressive collapse — with a global exterior collapse that was captured on the videos.The first omission concerns flange-to-web stiffeners on the south end of the girder (A2001). See drawing 9114. These omitted stiffeners would prevent the girder flange from folding when the girder web moved beyond the seat, requiring twice the possible expansion of the beams framing into the girder from the east to move the girder far enough to the west for it to fall off its seat.2. OMISSION OF THREE LATERAL SUPPORT BEAMS ON THE 13TH FLOOR G3005 BEAM:NIST omitted three lateral support beams from the exterior frame to the north-most beam (G3005) framing into the A2001 girder between columns 44 and 79 from the east. The NIST WTC 7 report contains a second possible failure initiation mechanism, where G3005 buckles and causes the other four beams framing into the girder from the east (A3004, B3004, C3004, and K3004) to also buckle, lose their load-carrying capability, collapse downward, and rock (pull) the girder off its seats back to the east. When these lateral support beams are excluded in the NIST analysis, the beam slenderness is increased by 16 times, and this reduces the actual buckling load to 6% of what it would have been in reality. Analysis with the lateral support beams included shows that the beam would not buckle and that it would actually deflect the girder and put the other four beams in tension, eliminating any chance of them buckling, as beams and columns need to be in compression in order to buckle.3. WTC 7 COLLAPSE AT FREE-FALL ACCELERATION IS NOT EXPLAINED:After initially denying it, NIST was ultimately forced into a public acknowledgement in their final report on WTC 7 that the building fell at full free-fall acceleration for 2.25 seconds, during which time it traversed the vertical distance of eight stories, or just over 100 feet. However, there is no attempt in the report to confront the implications that there could not have been any structural resistance during this eight-story fall at gravitational acceleration. Since every other skyscraper in history that has fallen in the manner in which WTC 7 did was an explosive controlled demolition, and since there is abundant eyewitness testimony of explosions and molten iron as well as chemical evidence of incendiaries found in the debris pile, one would expect NIST to at least consider the possibility of explosive or incendiary use and test for them, according to the National Fire Protection Association investigation standard NFPA 921: Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations, which is strictly followed by the FDNY. Incredibly, NIST continues to refuse to test the remaining debris for explosives or incendiaries.4. VIDEOS OF THE COLLAPSE OF WTC 7 BETRAY NIST’S COMPUTER MODEL:The exterior of the NIST WTC 7 computer model shows large deformations, as would be expected in a natural collapse, which are not observed in the video of the actual event. There is no attempt in the report to explain this discrepancy. In footage of the actual collapse, the west penthouse of WTC 7, which spans nearly half the length of the roof, starts to fall one-half of a second prior to the full exterior collapse, yet the NIST report claims that the entire interior failed and completely collapsed prior to the exterior shell collapsing. Since there was little-to-no visible deformation of the exterior in the actual collapse and since the west penthouse collapse timing indicates near- simultaneous interior and exterior failure, it seems clear that the severe deformation of the building’s exterior in the NIST model shows that their model does not replicate the actual collapse situation at all. The west penthouse drop starting just prior to that of the exterior is also indicative of controlled demolition, where the interior columns are severed just a fraction of a second prior to the exterior, in order to create an inward pull on the exterior and keep the debris contained within the building’s footprint.References:Videos from September 11, 2001, showing the collapse of WTC 7 wtc 7 collapse WTC 7 Collaps - Previously Unreleased Footage of WTC 7NCSTAR 1-9 Pertinent short clip from the documentary film, 9/11: Explosive Evidence—Experts Speak Out 6 WTC7 Part 5 47 Stories in 7 Seconds - ESO - Experts Speak Out5. CLAIMS OF INVESTIGATING CONTROLLED DEMOLITION WITHOUT TESTING FOR EXPLOSIVE RESIDUES: In their WTC 7 FAQ, NIST claims to have investigated whether the building could have been brought down by controlled demolition and concluded that it was not. NIST says this even while admitting that they did not test for explosive residues in the rubble, after initially claiming that they “found no evidence of explosives or explosive residues” (while also making the simultaneous claim that no steel was saved from WTC 7 for analysis). Their conclusion is simply based on their claims that there were no sound levels measured which they feel would be indicative of the size of an explosion needed to destroy column 79 and that rigging the building in an undetected way would be difficult.Belying the NIST argument that it would be difficult to rig WTC 7 without being detected, there was a secret retrofit of the Citibank Tower in New York City in 1978, due to an engineering error that could have allowed the building to topple in 70 mph winds. In that case, after the problem was realized, secrecy was maintained to keep building occupants and nearby residents from panicking, though there was very little actual risk of danger. An evacuation plan for the building and surrounding area was drawn up, with the intent to implement it if high winds were imminent.References:NIST FAQ on WTC 7, updated 6/27/2012: FAQs - NIST WTC 7 Investigation The Secret Retrofit of the Citibank Tower in 1978: The Secret Retrofit of the Citibank Tower in 19786. CHANGES OF STATEMENTS ON COMPOSITE BEAMS AND SHEAR STUD USE BETWEEN DRAFTS: NIST's draft WTC 7 report said, “Most of the beams and girders were made composite with the slabs through the use of shear studs. Typically, the shear studs were 0.75 inches in diameter by 5 inches long, spaced 1 to 2 feet on center.” However, in the final WTC 7 report, NIST says shear studs were not used on the girders. The significance here is that they claim the 13th floor A2001 girder was pushed off its seat at column 79 by thermally expanded beams from the east side of the building. If shear studs had been used on the girders, it would have been impossible for the beams to push the girder off its seat with the column. No drawings are shown in the final report to substantiate this new claim.In their WTC 7 model, NIST does not heat the concrete, only the steel. The implication is then made that the shear studs in the beams are broken due to differential expansion of the steel and concrete, allowing the beams to freely expand and force the now non-shear- studded girder off its seat at column 79, causing floors 12 and lower surrounding column 79 to collapse, leaving the column without sufficient lateral support and causing it to become unstable and to buckle. Concrete has nearly the same Coefficient of Thermal Expansion (CTE) as steel and would expand and contract at almost the same rate when heated or cooled. There is no analysis or any attempt to justify the position that the steel would have heated up to a greater degree than the concrete and produced a differential expansion. No physical testing was done to investigate the actual behavior of the materials involved; only computer modeling was performed without increasing the temperature of the concrete at all.References:See copy of NIST NCSTAR 1-1 (Draft), p. 14 http://web.archive.org/web/20051219234553/wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1-1.pdfNCSTAR 1-1A, pp. 49, 50NCSTAR 1-9 Vol. 1, pp. 15, 341-360NCSTAR 1-9 Vol. 2, pp. 529, 534, 535, 546, 561, 603, 6157. REFUSING OF FOIA REQUESTS: A registered structural engineer's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to NIST for calculations and analysis substantiating the walk-off failures of horizontal members from their seats, at columns 79 and 81, was denied in January 2010 by the director of NIST, who claimed that releasing this data “might jeopardize public safety.” On the contrary, if it were a peculiar situation that NIST had discovered, it would be the refusal to release this information to the architects and engineers who are tasked with the public’s safety that would be jeopardizing that very safety.References:The NIST letter refusing to release calculations and analysis substantiating the walk-off failures at columns 79 and 81 is available at http://cryptome.org/wtc-nist-wtc7-no.pdfPertinent short clip from the documentary film, 9/11: Explosive Evidence—Experts Speak Out 4 WTC7 Part 3 Investigation That Ignored the Facts - ESO - Experts Speak Out8. NEGLIGENCE IN SALVAGING STEEL: At one point, NIST admitted that only 0.25% to 0.50 % of the steel from the Twin Towers was saved for analysis. Later, NIST claimed that none of the steel from WTC 7 was saved for analysis. At another time, NIST mentioned that Dr. John Gross was in the salvage yards and was involved in the selection of pieces of steel to save. The NIST WTC Tower and WTC 7 reports do not explain why so little steel was saved and, incredibly, in the case of the Twin Towers, was dismissive when forced to admit that the steel saved from the buildings did not show that it had experienced high temperatures, by contending that “the sample size was not sufficient to be representative.” Why didn’t Dr. Gross save a sufficient sample size? The space required to store the steel would have been insignificant relative to the massive and historic issues to be resolved.References:At 5:00 minutes into this video, Dr. John Gross says he was on the WTC site and in the steel yards early on 9/11: NIST engineer John Gross denies WTC molten steel (extended)NCSTAR 1-3, p. 27NCSTAR 1-3, Paragraph 6.6.2, p. 95 Pertinent short clip from the documentary film, 9/11: Explosive Evidence—Experts Speak Out: 3 WTC7 Part 2 Destruction of Evidence - ESO - Experts Speak Out9. IGNORING THE RESULTS OF FEMA 403, APPENDIX C: NIST did not take the FEMA documentation of melted steel and sulfidation in its Appendix C forensic analysis as being indicative of something that could have contributed to the collapses. Instead, NIST claims, without a basis, that the damage was caused in the rubble pile, although the extreme temperatures required to melt steel and the presence of sulfidation have no logical mechanism there.In February 2012 an FOIA request produced three photos, taken during October 2001, showing Dr. John Gross of NIST posing with a heavily eroded WTC 7 beam. These photos contradict Dr. Gross’ statements about not witnessing steel that had been subjected to high temperatures. In fact, Dr. Gross was on the team headed by Dr. Jonathan Barnett, who was responsible for discovering, during the FEMA investigation, the WTC 7 beam featured in the Appendix C forensic analysis, which was melted and sulfidated. This is one of the steel beams the ends of which Barnett had previously described as “partially evaporated.” Such evaporation required temperatures exceeding 4,000° F.References:FEMA World Trade Center Building Performance Study Appendix C http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdfPertinent short clip from the documentary film,9/11: Explosive Evidence—Experts Speak Out 15 Ground Zero Part 1 Melted Steel Beams and Molten Iron - ESO - Experts Speak OutPhoto below of NIST WTC 7 report leader John Gross in steel yards with melted and eroded steel:10. INVOLVEMENT IN NOT SAVING STEEL FOR INVESTIGATION: In their initial draft report on the three building collapses, NIST claims that none of the steel from WTC 7 was saved for analysis. This is disconcerting, considering WTC 7 would have been the first steel-framed high-rise in history to ostensibly completely collapse due to fire.Alarmingly, in their final report on WTC 7 in November 2008, NIST makes no mention of the fact that no steel was saved from WTC 7 for analysis.This is confusing, as we now know that Dr. John Gross was involved as early as October 2001 in selecting pieces of steel to save for the NIST investigations into the failures of all three buildings.References:NIST NCSTAR 1-3D (Draft), pp. 271, 273 http://web.archive.org/web/20060221020101/wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1-3DDraft.pdfPertinent short clip from the documentary film, 9/11: Explosive Evidence—Experts Speak Out 3 WTC7 Part 2 Destruction of Evidence - ESO - Experts Speak Out11. FIRE SIMULATIONS AND DURATIONS ARE EXAGGERATED: The fire severity and durations shown in the NIST reports do not match the observations in the videos of all three skyscrapers. They are highly exaggerated. The actual fires, particularly in WTC 2, are nearly exhausted, with thick black smoke indicating cooler fires. The WTC 7 fires are few, small, and scattered. On floor 12, the location of the fires that NIST claims to have caused the initiation of collapse due to thermal expansion are shown to be burned out more than one hour prior to the building's fall. Thus they could not have been responsible for WTC 7's destruction, as the expanding beams would have cooled and contracted by then.References:NCSTAR 1-5, 1-5A, 1-5B, 1-5C, 1-5E, 1-5GE. Douglas, “The NIST WTC Investigation--How Real Was The Simulation?” Journal of 9/11 Studies, Vol. 6, pp. 1-27, December 2006 http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200612/NIST-WTC-Investigation.pdfPertinent short clip from the documentary film, 9/11: Explosive Evidence—Experts Speak Out 5 WTC7 Part 4 Fully Engulfed in Fire? - ESO - Experts Speak Out12. NO DISCUSSION OF THE MOLTEN METAL FOUND IN THE RUBBLE OF THE THREE COLLAPSED BUILDINGS: Dr. John Gross has denied that there is evidence of molten iron/steel in the rubble of the three collapsed buildings, despite numerous eyewitnesses testifying to this and despite the physical evidence of what have come to be called “meteorites,” which are made up of solidified slag from pools of molten iron and steel that were “flowing like lava,” according to firefighters. Again, the significance here is that the temperatures which can be achieved by diffuse flame hydrocarbon or office fires range from 600° to a maximum of 1,800° F, which is well below the 2,750° F initial melting temperature of steel and iron.References:Excerpt from AWN by Jeff Prager, 2016, 318 pages:Box“Dr. Cahill and his UC Davis team, Delta Group, set up atmospheric testing equipment between October 2nd and the 30th of 2001. Their collective data supports tem- peratures in excess of 2500C almost two months after the event. A fire, even supported by remnant iron rich aluminum in a silica substrate with a 300mps velocity would be easily and rapidly extinguished with 1,200 (minimum) gallons of Pyrocool® (see Pyrocool® industry analysis pages 125-127) but Pyrocool® failed.“...the continuing emission of these plumes, especially after the heavy rains of September 14 and the increasingly effective efforts of fire suppression in mid- and late September, are not fully understood. Factors which are essential for an in-depth analysis are the chemical composition of the materials that could be aerosolized and the energy sources available in the collapse piles. In this regard, the kinetic energy of the two aircraft is negligible (<1%) compared to the chemical energy in the roughly 25,000 liters of fuel in each plane (some of which was burned outside the buildings). The gravita- tional potential energy of the collapse was capable of raising the entire mass of debris only a few degrees K. The largest energy sources available are the combustible materials present in the buildings and furnishings and a significant body of fuel, especially under World Trade Center #7, in the form of diesel fuel for emergency electrical generators and large quantities of oil in various forms in the Consolidated Edison substation, also under World Trade Center #7. Very high temperatures occurred in the burning floors of the buildings prior to collapse and during the first few days of active surface fires, as shown by the melting of metals. Later, infrared surveys showed surface temperatures in the collapse pile were as high as 30 K above ambient in October, and much higher subsurface temperatures were inferred from the lower portions of removed steel beams glowing red. The subsurface of the collapse piles remained hot for months despite use of massive amounts of water to cool them, with the last spontaneous surface fire occurring in mid-December.Satellite and photographic observations of the aerosol plumes are extremely useful in characterizing plume transport, especially in the early days when few other measurements were performed or were available. On the evening of September 11, the area of lower Manhattan Island was blanketed with a dark gray smoke. On September 12 at 11:30 AM, the Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus (ETM +) aboard the Landsat 7 satellite showed a dispersed plume moving WNW to SSW in a broad plume over roughly 120 degrees angular dispersion, while later that same day IKONOS showed a whitish coherent plume no more than about 0.3 km wide lofting above the buildings as it moved south towards open water (IKONOS 2001). Heavy rains occurred on September 14, which helped the Fire Department of New York (FDNY) extinguish surface fires while wetting the massive dust deposits. The plume detected by IKONOS on September 16 was much less intense and much darker than the plume of September 12, and the lofting is not as evident. All of these were consistent with the improved conditions on the collapse pile observed during rescue operations. In late September, World Trade Center rescue operations gradually ceased and recovery operations began and with them greatly increased fire suppression efforts, including wetting agents and use of heavy equipment to begin unpeeling the collapse pile.” Yet the fires raged for 100 days in spite of all efforts and were declared officially out on December 10th.“Boiling glass and soil” and “regenerating” aerosols is how Dr. Cahill at UC Davis explains it.1200 Gallons of Pyrocool® FAIL:“Pyrocool® Technologies, Inc., was founded in 1991 to address the need to research, develop and create a new generation of industrial and commercial fire-fighting products. Its primary goal was to develop fire-fighting foams grounded in new technologies to replace conventional fire-fighting methods. Although very good in certain instances, existing fire-fighting foams had proven to cause harmful environmental side effects as well as the potential for long-term potential toxicity to humans. Pyrocool® Technologies’ efforts led to the development of Pyrocool® Fef, the most versatile fire fighting foam available today. Unlike other foams, Pyrocool® Fef can be used effectively on both pressurized and 3 dimensional fires, as well as on Class D combustible metal fires. As a pro Bono effort, product and personnel were immediately dispatched to Brevard County to fight the encroaching wildland fires on Cape Canaveral and the Kennedy Space Center. Pyrocool® Fef has successfully extinguished many large-scale fires including the oil tanker Nassia in the Bosporus Strait near Istanbul, Turkey. Lloyd’s of London had estimated that the fire would take at least one week to extinguish using conventional methods; however, using Pyrocool® the fire was extinguished in just 12.5 minutes. Just 1800 liters of Pyrocool® Fef was required to totally extinguish the fire. A truly stunning result in a situation that the respected Maritime Register and Engineering News called “one of the worst fires in recent years,” SMIT TAK manager Geert Koffeman told press officials. Pyrocool® Fef is a very aggressive fire weapon. It is just as effective against 3-D fires as surface fires and firefighters can attack the flames directly. The Nassia case shows what can be achieved ... there is no doubt that Pyrocool® Fef will have a major impact on the conduct of marine firefighting and salvage operations.” Pyrocool® Fef is used exclusively by Smit International (Rotterdam) for use on marine fires worldwide; a significant commitment by the world’s most prestigious marine salvor. In 1998, Pyrocool® was used to successfully extinguish a train fire in Virginia that was one of the 50 most destructive fires in the United States that year, as reported by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). In late September 2001, Pyrocool® was used to extinguish fires at the World Trade Center in New York. A five man Emergency Response Team from Pyrocool® Technologies, Inc. assisted the Fire Department of New York (FDNY) in extinguishing fires burning deep beneath Ground Zero. Pyrocool® Fef was the only fire extinguishment product to be used on the World Trade Center fires. But it didn’t work at Ground Zero.13. REFUSAL TO TEST FOR EXPLOSIVE RESIDUE:NIST has admitted that they did not test for explosives, and their director of public relations is on record saying, “If you are going to test for something that is not there, you are wasting your time and the taxpayers’ money.” In the oral histories taken down in late 2001 and early 2002 from New York City emergency personnel, there are over 100 individuals who make comments about seeing, hearing, and experiencing explosions.These oral histories were documented well before NIST started their WTC investigation in September 2002. This testimony should have caused the presumption that there was a good chance explosive residue would be found — and justified testing for it rather than the opposite. On what basis would NIST have presumed that there was little chance of explosive residue to be found and that it would be a waste of time and money?NIST acknowledges in their response to a Request for Correction submitted by AE911Truth that they are “unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse.” And yet NIST refused to consider the possibility that explosives could have been used to cause the collapses of the Twin Towers — though controlled demolition is consistent with all of the available technical evidence.References:J. Abel, “Theories of 9/11,” Hartford Advocate, Hartford, Connecticut, January 29, 2008 Theories of 9/11The September 11 records via The New York Times http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/met_WTC_histories_full_01.htmlG. MacQueen, “118 Witnesses: The Firefighters’ Testimony to Explosions in the Twin Towers,” Journal of 9/11 Studies, Vol. 2, pp. 1-60, August 2006 http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/Article_5_118Witnesses_WorldTradeCenter.pdfRequest for Correction of the NIST WTC report http://stj911.org/actions/NIST_DQA_Petition.pdfNIST’s answer to the above Request for Correction http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2007/NISTresponseToRequestForCorrectionGourleyEtal2.pdfNIST August 2006 FAQ National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster Answers to Frequently Asked Questions (August 30, 2006)Dr. David Ray Griffin’s essay, “The Destruction of the World Trade Center: Why the Official Account Cannot Be True” The Destruction of the World Trade Center:Pertinent short clips from the documentary film, 9/11: Explosive Evidence—Experts Speak Out 4 WTC7 Part 3 Investigation That Ignored the Facts - ESO - Experts Speak Out o 13 WTC TT Part 4 Eyewitness Reports of Explosions - ESO - Experts Speak Out14. FAILURE TO FOLLOW STANDARD FIRE INVESTIGATION PROTOCOL:NIST and FEMA did not follow standard procedure for fire and explosion investigations. This is covered in the National Fire Protection Association’s investigation standard NFPA 921, Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations, where it is clearly stated that looking for explosive residues and accelerants is the standard procedure for fire and explosion investigations. NFPA 921 also states that if they are not tested for one should be prepared to explain why they weren’t.NIST is often responsible for generating information from which the NFPA standards are written. Why would the NFPA standard not be followed in this case? NIST has not answered this question publicly.References:National Fire Protection Association, “Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations,” NFPA 92115. STRIPPING OF THE FIRE PROOFING IS EXAGGERATED:NIST claims that the aircraft impact debris in WTC 1 stripped the fireproofing materials from the floor truss assemblies — even on the opposite side of the building from the impact — to the point where the floor assembly steel was then vulnerable to fire. NIST attempted to validate this hypothesis with ballistic firing equipment, firing buckshot and shrapnel at steel plates and bars coated with SFRM (Sprayed on Fire Resistant Material). During the testing, the gun was fired at velocities of approximately 500 ft/s and produced damage to the SFRM, but at one point it misfired and produced a projectile velocity of just 102 ft/s (31 m/s), which resulted in no damage to the SFRM.WTC 1 was impacted on the north side of the building. NIST claims that the fireproofing was stripped from the trusses on the south side, causing them to sag and pull the south face of the building inward, initiating the collapse. However, NIST’s own analysis of the aircraft’s deceleration, 0.40 seconds after impacting WTC 1 on the north face, shows the debris field moving at approximately 51 ft/s (15 m/s) as it enters the floor assembly area on the south side of the building. How can NIST justify the aircraft debris damaging the SFRM on the floor assembly steel on the south side of the building when their own testing and analyses seem to rule it out?16. PRE-COLLAPSE STEEL TEMPERATURES ARE EXAGGERATEDTechnical Statement: NIST’s own physical testing for actual steel temperatures on the 236 pieces they selected from the Twin Towers in the areas closest to the hottest fires showed that only three pieces had experienced temperatures above 250° C — a temperature where steel has not yet lost any strength. Of those three, none had experienced temperatures beyond 600° C, the point at which structural steel loses about half its strength. Note this critical zone in the graph below. NIST’s own physical evidence shows that the vast majority of the steel had not experienced temperatures where it lost any strength, though in the report NIST claims a large number of steel structural members would have been heated to temperatures of 700° C.:References:NCSTAR 1-3C Chapter 6NCSTAR 1-3 paragraph 6.6.2, p. 95NCSTAR 1-5B Chapter 11NCSTAR 1-5GPertinent short clip from the documentary film, 9/11: Explosive Evidence—Experts Speak Out 10 WTC TT Part 1 Myth Unravels - ESO - Experts Speak Out Below, chart from Corus Construction showing steel strength at increased temperature compared to room temperature strength17. TESTED FLOOR ASSEMBLIES DID NOT FAIL:NIST hired Underwriter Laboratories to perform testing of the Twin Tower floor assemblies per ASTM E119 in a two-hour, 2,000° F fire test. During the tests, the main trusses did not fail — and sagged only 4” after 60 minutes and 6” after 100 minutes, which were the approximate durations of the fires in WTC 2 and WTC 1, respectively. NIST was clearly not using these test results as their basis when they showed the main trusses sagging more than 40” in their models.References:Anonymous and F. Legge, “Falsifiability and the NIST WTC Report: A Study in Theoretical Adequacy,” Journal of 9/11 Studies, Vol. 29, pp. 1-20, March 2010 http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Falsifiability.pdf18. INITIATION OF COLLAPSE – “INWARD BOWING” WAS INDUCED ARTIFICIALLYTechnical Statement: The NIST report claims that the collapse of WTC 1 was initiated by the south exterior wall buckling. The report claims that this was due to “inward bowing” and buckling of the exterior columns — alleged to be caused by sagging of the floor trusses. However, the NIST computer model did not show this to occur with natural inputs and sagging floor trusses. To actually cause the perimeter column failure, an artificial lateral load of 5,000 lbs. had to be applied to each perimeter column from the outside of the building. In reality, there was of course no such force available.NIST claims, in a circular argument, that this artificial lateral load was applied to the exterior columns in an attempt to match the observed inward bowing, even though their model could not produce it naturally with their theory of sagging trusses causing it. It is much more likely that the core columns, which would have been falling after their failure was caused by explosives or incendiaries, would have pulled on the trusses with great force, generating the observed inward bowing of the exterior columns to which the opposite end of the trusses were attached.References:NCSTAR 1-6D, pp. 180, 181, Chapter 5, and Appendix A

Dear Buddies,Here i have listed top mobile app development companies, please go through it and let me know.1. Hakuna Matata Solutions Pvt LtdAbout : " Hakuna matata works closely with clients to form long term mobile strategy and executes that across mobile platforms. Hakuna Matata solutions is one of the early starters in mobile revolution and helped organizations to build successful mobile products across mobile platforms and to launch it in multiple countries. "Years of Experience: 11+Clients: BioQuest, Ticket Goose, Lifto, Brothersgas, DinamalarAddress: 22/23, VGP Selva Nagar 2nd Main Road, Velacheri, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600044, IndiaContact: +91 90251 366222. Cabot Technology SolutionsAbout: " We are a team of technologists who share the love for mobility. We’ve made a reputation for crafting vibrant innovative solutions to global clients. We deliver everything you need to go mobile."Years of Experience: 10+Clients: Atmel Corporation, Emera, Cypress Semiconductors, SAPAddress: #102, First Floor, Lulu Cyber Tower, infopark, Kochi, Kerala 682042, IndiaContact: +91 484 404 55553. ChromeInfo TechnologiesAbout: " ChromeInfo Technologies is a Software Development & Services Company with expertise in Mobile Apps Development, Web Development and Software Testing Services, headquartered in India with almost 6 years of experience. We offer Mobile Consulting and Customized Design, Development & Testing Solutions best suited to any industry. "Years of Experience: 6+Clients: SniffSnout, Easy Ticket, Next BeltAddress: C-260 Sector 63 Noida, UP 201301 IndiaContact: +91 120-412-46754. Code Brew LabsAbout: "Code Brew Labs is a Mobile App Development and Analytics Company formed in 2013, which specializes in Mobile App Strategy, Mobile App Design, Mobile App Development, User Acquisition, and Mobile App Analytics."Years of Experience: 3+Clients: Coca- Cola India, Scotiabank, EmBazaar Inc.Address: Arthprakash building, Sector 29 D , Chandigarh 160030Contact: +91-869-958-45655. Copper MobileAbout: "We help our clients solve complex business problems using innovative mobile solutions"Years of Experience: 6+Clients: Cisco, verizon, silverleafContact: +91-120-420-54006. Hyperlink InfoSystemAbout: "Established in 2011, Hyperlink InfoSystem, with it’s dedicated and skilled team of professionals has able to create dynamic and cost effective solutions for it’s clients that are based all over the USA, UK, Japan, Canada and other parts of the World."Years of Experience: 5+Clients: Macys, hi5, zapwebAddress: Ganesh Meredian, Block C, 106/B Near Sola Bridge, Opp Gujarat High Court,, S.G. India, Road East, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380061, IndiaContact: +91 80001 611617. iMobDevAbout: "Being a diverse app development company, iMobDev serve Application Development in iOS and Android as well as web design & development. iMovDev offer a range of expertise aimed at helping customers increase their businesses through unmatched services to compete successfully in an ever-changing marketplace."Years of Experience: 7+Clients: UniLever, FigJam, Triber, Game2GameAddress: 404, Shail’s Mall, B/H Girish Cold Drink, CG Road, Ahmedabad-09, Gujarat, IndiaContact: +91 815 506 38388. Konstant InfosolutionsAbout: "Konstant Infosolutions has been working in the same industry since 2003 and serve an offshore client with the best services. Our developers have acquired extensive knowledge of web & mobile app development to effectively deliver solutions to clients across a spectrum of industries while overcoming various challenges, meeting deadlines and maintaining the quality standards."Years of Experience: 13+Clients: Citrix Systems, RawBank, Scholastic, NASSCOM, RaytecAddress: A-23, Swej Farm, Opposite Park, Reliance Fresh Lane, New Sanganer Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302019, IndiaContact: +91-141-22913989. Market SimplifiedAbout: "Market Simplified is a Leader in crafting mobile solutions for financial services institutions across the globe. The move from just ‘Connecting the Channels’ to ‘Engineering Experiences’ is clearly becoming the way to the future."Years of Experience: 3+Clients: MB Trading, Aditya Birla Money, Kotak Mahindra BankAddress: 13th Floor, Zenith Building, Ascendas International Tech Park, CSIR Road, Taramani, Chennai – 600 113. Tamilnadu, India.Contact: +91 (44) 3090 309010. Mind InventoryAbout: "Mindinventory is a leading company in mobile app development services across the globe for effective and innovative application for iPhone, iPad and Android."Years of Experience: 5+Clients: Panasonic, Maersk, InMyDiary PVT LMTAddress: A/302 Smita Tower, Opp. AUDA Garden, Memnagar, 380052 Ahmedabad, Gujarat, IndiaContact: (+91) 963-844-458011. ContusAbout: "A company headquartered in Chennai having 8+ years of expertise in delivering technologically rich mobile applications for industries like e-commerce, automobile, health, safety etc and utility apps."Years of Experience: 8+Clients: Mahindra, Dr. REDDY’S, Accenture, Sports CornerAddress: Kamak Towers, Lazer Street, SIDCO Industrial Estate, Gandhi Nagar, Guindy, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600032 IndiaContact: +91 44 6456 079612. MobikasaAbout: "From full-service developments to a la carte services, we guide and help our clients to launch the most scalable web apps and Mobile apps. "Years of Experience: 5+Clients: Versace, Howcast, TagmapAddress: D-45, Phase-1, Chattarpur Enclave, Chattarpur, New Delhi – 110 074Contact: +91 98104 8888313.Nine HertzAbout: "At Nine Hertz, we shape your ideas into reality. Touch of web into mobile with admirable designs take you to the top of all industry levels. Clients over 14 countries trusted Nine Hertz for the outstanding services and so you can count on for your dream success to be crafted by us."Years of Experience: 8+Clients: Vodafone, Casio, MTSAddress: 44/8, Mansarovar, Jaipur. 302020 IndiaContact: +91-89478-4495414. NMG TechnologiesAbout: "Our team of talented designers, developers and internet marketing experts has been providing custom design, application development and internet marketing services to clients in USA, UK, Australia and around the world."Years of Experience: 11+Clients: Enterprise Clients: Intuit, Nasscom, UB CoolAddress: 205(2nd Floor), HB Twin Towers, Netaji Subhash Place, Pitampura, New Delhi- 110034, IndiaContact: +91-11-6464737015. Octal Info SolutionAbout: "The company has the reputation of delivering niche solutions in the areas of web and mobile app development. Octal has repeatedly prescribed quality as its virtue."Years of Experience: 12+Clients: Fiat, oricom, AvivaAddress: 6/78, Roop Vihar Colony, Hari Marg, Malviya Nagar, JaipurContact: +91-141-252581016. OpenXcellAbout: "One of the pioneers in mobile app development services, we at Openxcell have witnessed the entire evolution of mobile software since inception. Setting a benchmark in making quality mobile apps."Years of Experience: 7+Clients: Web Managment Services, Interactive Elementary, OincsAddress: 202-203, Baleshwar Avenue, Opposite Rajpath Club, SG Highway, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380054, IndiaContact: +91 99982 2292917. Prismetric TechnologiesAbout: "Prismetric is a venture of two technocrats having their individual core expertise in mobile solutions, web solutions, CRM solutions and Business Intelligence solutions."Years of Experience: 8+Clients: CWC, Today, PeugeotAddress: 204B Infocity IT Tower-1 Gandhinagar, Gujarat 382007 IndiaContact: +91-79-4007036718. QBurstAbout: "We really enjoyed working with the QBurst team. They were very responsive to our needs and really helped accelerate our development on a critical mobile project."Years of Experience: 12+Clients: DMCC, National Geo graphics, DellAddress: Technopark Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala IndiaContact: +91-471-653-751019. Riktam TechnologiesAbout: "We value superior design, elegance of simple solutions and going that extra mile for our customers’ success. We follow a consultative approach and believe in partnering and collaborating with our clients in the best possible way."Years of Experience: 9+Clients: FoodyBuddy, My Bus Tickets, whizzleAddress: #201, Wings Srinagar Colony Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh 500073 IndiaContact:+91 40 6668830520. Space-O TechnologiesAbout: "Space-O Technologies is one stop solution for all your mobile apps development needs. From concept to development to marketing to ongoing maintenance, Space-O delivers, no matter how diverse or complex the project is."Years of Experience: 6+Clients: Nightowl, School Reviewer, FT cashAddress: 1005, 10th Floor, Abhishree Adroit, Mansi Circle, Beside Gwalia Sweet, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, IndiaContact: +91 960 143 399821. SystematixAbout: "We at Systematix firmly believe in making Technology easy and accessible. Whether its you or your customer. Our primary focus is to give excellent User Experience in order to have an easy, fast and enjoyable journey of going through your website assets."Years of Experience: 20+Clients: Shell, Volvo, BrainReadAddress: Plot No 67, PU-4 Commercial Behind C21 Mall, A B Road Indore (M. P.) – 452 010 INDIAContact: +91 731 257028222. TechAheadAbout: "TechAhead is a mobile consulting, design and custom apps development company with a global reach. Through apps, we have created success stories for fortune 1000 companies and startups alike. We bring app ideas to life nurturing through its each stage of development from concept to the final user experience."Years of Experience: 7+Clients: Melltoo, Headlines Today, Allianz AssistanceAddress: 8th Floor, Tower A, Green Boulevard, Plot No.B-9/A, Sector-62, Noida, Uttar Pradesh, INDIAContact: +91 120 458990023. Timebender TechnologiesAbout: "We are a bunch of wizards and our wizardry is science. We don’t remain taking content in our magical world but thrive to put our wizardry to best use and bring magical products to our customers. We are constantly exploring the realms of technology to create a life altering experience through our services."Years of Experience: 3+Clients: Talk about NewsAddress: No -34, Marutham Complex, Maruthamalai Road, Vadavalli,Coimbatore, Tamilnadu, IndiaContact: +(91) 999402318524. VITEBAbout: "VITEB is a full-service Digital Agency with its global headquarters in India and offering a comprehensive suite of Web & Mobile App solutions to clients based across USA, UK, Europe, Australia, Africa and the Middle East."Years of Experience: 10+Clients: Uni Tex, Delta Quants, Au2netAddress: 801-A Synergy, Prahladnagar Corporate Road, Ahmedabad 380051, INDIAContact: +91 79 4037201725. WegileAbout: "We build online brands through trusted mobile apps and supporting web apps that help our clients achieve their business goals."Years of Experience: 3+Clients: fitspark, The fan app, waddleAddress: E-41, IA, Phase 8, Mohali, INDIAContact: +91-172-400-2727