Why NO 911 INVESTGATION on what made the WTC collapse...listen.

[cthrumatrix]

Many people have stated they have heard "bangs" in the WTC buidlings at lower levels than the planes had hit....and thus a controlled demolition...why no investigation?


take a listen at 1:30 into the three minute clip.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1535000/video/_1537652_wtc13_evans_vi.ram


and this one as well...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1535000/video/_1537470_wtc14_rajan_vi.ram

[DUreader]

1. There is a cover-up of almost every aspect of 911

I think we are supposed to 'get over it'

[King_Crimson]

2. Some informative reading on this...

http://www.serendipity.li/wtc.html

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

3. Columbia University Seismic Readings on 9-11-2001...

...further proof of secondary explosions causing the towers to collapse, I have read this at another site, with more technical detail and will look for it. Try this for starters:

<snip>

The collapse of the two towers produced larger events, equivalent to a magnitude 2.1 temblor for the south tower and magnitude 2.3 for the north, "which can definitely be felt," Lerner-Lam says. Surprisingly, the energy transferred from the falling buildings into the ground was only a tiny fraction of the total energy involved in the collapse.

<snip>

<http://www.discover.com/dec_01/feat_shook.html>


<snip>

The seismic record from Columbia University’s observatory in Palisades, NY (21 miles away) provides indisputable proof that massive explosions brought down those towers. At the precise moment the South Tower began collapsing, a 2.1 earthquake registered on the seismograph. At the precise moment the North Tower began collapsing, a 2.3 earthquake registered; however, as the buildings started to crumble these waves disappeared. The two ‘spikes’on the seismograph, which both occurred at the exact instants the collapses began, are twenty times the amplitude, or more than 100 times the force of the other waves. If the buildings had simply collapsed, the largest jolts would have occurred when the massive debris struck the earth, not at the beginnings of the collapses. Seismologist Arthur Lerner-Lam of Columbia University stated, “Only a small fraction of the energy from the collapsing towers was converted into ground motion. The ground shaking that resulted from the collapse of the towers was extremely small.” In other words, the collapsing did not cause 2.1 and 2.3 magnitude earthquakes. Furthermore, a ‘sharp spike of short duration’ is how underground nuclear explosions register on seismographs. Underground explosions, where the steel columns meet Manhattans granite would account for both the demolition-style implosions and these ‘spikes’ on the seismograph. Another seismologist at the Palisades observatory, Won Young Kim said the 1993 truck bomb did not even register on their seismographs because the explosion was ‘not coupled’ to the ground. Imagine the magnitude of explosions it would take to register the two earthquakes, when the truck bomb didn’t even show up.

<snip>

<http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_lavello_050503_bombs.html>


Very interesting reading.

[gandalf]

4. Why it is so clear that the spikes are at the beginning of the collapse?

Would it be possible to argue that the spikes where at the END of the collapse process, and the other waves that follow the huge spike are only some smaller parts or just the consequences of the huge spike in form of oscillation?
As far as I remember, the report of the University of Columbia doesn't state exactly both the start and the end time of the collapse, and the time scale on the diagram is not very clear.
To make it clear: I think it plausible that the spikes mark the beginning of the collapses, but I want to be sure that the argument is safe against sceptics.

Is anybody aware of published opinions of seismic experts on the nature of the seismic spikes?