Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Education & ReferenceOther - Education · 1 decade ago

could anyone take like 10 minutes?

and help me out by reading through what i have on for my research paper so far? i know its long, but please? i want to know what you think about it in regards to grammar and technical stuff, not subject matter.

On September 11, 2001, our country witnessed one of the greatest tragedies to have occurred on American soil. Terrorist attacks were carried out on World Trade Center Buildings, World Trade 7 and the Pentagon. According to the official reports, on September 11, 2001.8:45 am, American Airlines Flight 11, a Boeing 757 aircraft, slammed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center, loaded with approximately 20,000 gallons of jet fuel (Wheeler 17). Eighteen minutes later, United Airlines Flight 175, also a Boeing 757 aircraft, flies directly into the southeast corner of the South Tower of the World Trade Center (Wheeler 17). Both plane’s loads of jet fuel ignited upon impact and reached maximum temperatures of 2000 F, which melted the buildings internal steel structure

Update:

causing them to collapse in under twelve seconds after burning only fifty-six and one hundred three minutes, respectively (Wheeler 16). At 9:38 AM, American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the ground floor of the Pentagon, leaving a hole, which later caused a larger collapse of this building. The Government would like to have it be believed that this was a terrorist attack carried out by men living in caves half a world away, but unfortunately, the truth is a little closer to home then what they have led us to believe. The government was involved in these heinous acts and it will be proven.

The first, and most obvious, flaw in the official story is the fact that it is scientifically impossible for steel to reach its melting point at 2000F, the highest temperature at which jet fuel can burn, but that is only if the fuel supply is maintained (Wikipedia, 1). Jet fuel has to burn for a minimum of 40 continuous minutes before reaching its highest temperature. The 20,000 gallons of

Update 2:

of jet fuel inside Flight 11 burned off in a matter of seconds. The majority of the jet fuel onboard Flight 175 exploded outside the building in a massive fireball, leaving very little, if any, fuel to even burn inside the South Tower, let alone melt the steel to the point of a collapse (Loose Change, 35:12). The World Trade Center towers were constructed out of 200,000 tons of steel, 425,000 cubic yards of concrete, 103 elevators, 43,600 windows, 60,000 tons of cooling equipment, and a 3,060 ft television antenna (Loose Change, 33:55).

Kevin Ryan, head of Underwriters Laboratories (the company that certified the steel used to build the World Trade Center) writes in a letter to Frank Gale of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, “We know that the steel components were certified ASTM E119. The time temperature curves for this standard require the samples to be exposed to temperatures around 2000 degrees F for several hours. As we all agree, the steel applied mt

Update 3:

those specifications. Additionally, I think we can all agree that even un-fireproofed steel will not melt until reaching a red hot 3000F” (Rense 9).

What this means is, the steel used in the World Trade Center towers and World Trade Center 7 was tested in temperatures at or above the maximum burning temperature of jet fuel, to make sure it could withstand that kind of heat. Kevin Ryan’s testimony is in direct contradiction to the government’s story in that there is absolutely no way the building could have collapsed simply due to jet fuel and a four-floor fire. Only days after Kevin Ryan wrote this letter, he is fired from his position at Underwriters Laboratories (Loose Change, 38:17). Kevin’s statement is not the only proof that buildings of that type will not melt and collapse from fire.

On July 28, 1945, a B52 bomber lost in the fog, crashed into 79th floor of the Empire State Building. It left only 14 people dead and 1 million dollars worth of damage and the building

Update 4:

stands intact to this day (Loose Change, 32:00).

On Feb 14, 1975, a fire erupted between the 9th and 14th floors of the North Tower of the World Trade Center. According to the New York Times, the fires lead an eventual a decision to install fire sprinklers, but did not cause the building to collapse (Loose Change, 32:10).

On May 4, 1988, a 62-story skyscraper in Los Angeles, CA. burned for 3 hours straight and spread over four floors, the same number of floors as the Twin Towers, but it did not collapse (Loose Change, 32:30).

On February 23, 1991, a 38-story skyscraper in Philadelphia, built in 1973, the same year the Twin Towers were completed, burned for more than 19 hours and spread for over eight floors. It did not collapse (Loose Change, 32:40).

On October 17, 2004, a 56-story skyscraper in Venezuela, built in 1976, a fire burned for over 17 hours and spread over twenty-six floors, eventually reaching the roof. That is over eight times as many floors and sixteen times

Update 5:

times the amount of time the World Trade Center burned before collapsing. However, unlike the Towers, the Venezuelan skyscraper did not collapse (Loose Change, 33:55).

Last but not least, on February 12, 2005, the Windsor building in Madrid, a 32-story tower framed in steel reinforced concrete, burned for almost 24 hours completely destroying the top 10 stories of the building. Although the upper ten floors fell, the building itself still stood and did not collapse (Loose Change, 33:08).

A building that did collapse, allegedly from the same never before heard of cause, was the World Trade Center 7. It was a forty-seven story office building, 300 feet away from the North Tower, collapsing without warning later that same day at approximately 5:03 (Loose Change, 31:15). The official report released states that internal fires from falling debris of the Twin Towers ignited several fuel tanks inside the building and caused it to collapse. If this is true, it is only the third time

Update 6:

, it is only the third time in history a building has completely collapsed due to a fire (Loose Change, 31:39). The other two instances happened that same day - when the Twin Towers collapsed.

Another point to consider is the fact that World Trade 7 is completely surrounded by other buildings. Each one of which stood intact with very minor damage, while World Trade 7 suddenly fell straight down into a nice compact pile in an approximate total of 6 seconds. This is an extremely fast speed for a building to collapse in on itself (Loose Change 31:28).

In fact, all three buildings fell at almost exactly free fall speed. We can figure this out very simply by using Galileo’s Law of Falling Bodies. This calculates the time in which an object will a cover a distance in complete free fall. Distance = 16.08 x seconds squared. The South Tower was 1362 ft tall. 1362 = 16.08 x 84.7 or 9.2 seconds. The South Tower of the World Trade Center collapses to the ground in approximately 10

Update 7:

seconds, indicating that the buildings were traveling in a complete free fall, supposedly caused from fires, which burned only for 56, and 103 minutes respectively (Loose Change, 30:52). However, it has already been proven that these buildings could not have possibly collapsed due to fires. So, what could have possibly caused them to collapse at free fall speed - a controlled demolition?

Controlled demolitions use carefully placed explosives to quickly remove building material, including steel support columns and allow near free-fall-speed collapses (Harris, 2000). Some may argue that there was no way demolition bombs could have gotten into the building, but according to Daria Coard, a security guard at the North Tower, security detail had been working twelve hour shifts for the two weeks prior to the attacks, but on the Thursday before 9/11 the strenuous work schedule was mysteriously ended. On the same day, all bomb-sniffing dogs were unexplainably pulled from both towers

Update 8:

i wont let me ad the rest, so tell me what you think on this much.

Update 9:

yeah the wheelers are sources, and i would like to use your last suggestion, but unfortunatly we cant state anything we dont have facts to support and we cant atlk in the first person (i.e. i think, we should, you can) but thank you for your other sugestions :)

2 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    this for high school right?

    HRMMmmm, I went through more than half of it, try to apply some of the changes here to the rest. Grammar wise there really weren't too many mistakes, that I caught at least. Most of my corrections were just polished ways of saying what you said. Anyway, I'm tired but goodluck with your essay.

    P.S. Some guys in caves did knock down the towers : < )

    1. "on World Trade Center Buildings, World Trade 7 and the Pentagon" it was WTC 1 & 2, not sure what 7 is....Nywyz always put a comma before "&" if its more than 3 things: a,b, & c. So ",and the Pentagon". Terrorist never reached the Pentagon so, you should put "and attempted an attack"

    2."American Airlines Flight 11, a Boeing 757 aircraft, slammed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center, loaded with approximately 20,000 gallons of jet fuel (Wheeler 17)." too many commas in a sentence.

    something like this is better, split it into 2 v v v v

    "According to the official reports of September 11, 2001, at 8:45 am , the Boeing 757 American Airliner Flight 11 slammed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center. Asides from the hundreds of passengers it carried it was also loaded with approximately 20,000 gallons of jet fuel " not sure what wheeler was but you should fit it in there somwhere.

    3."Both plane’s loads of jet fuel ignited upon impact and reached maximum temperatures of 2000 F, which melted the buildings internal steel structure causing them to collapse in under twelve seconds after burning only fifty-six and one hundred three minutes, respectively (Wheeler 16)." too many commas once again. try this v v v v

    “The plane’s load of fuel ignited upon impact and started a fireball within each tower reaching 2000 F. The fires eventually over took the World Trade Centers, they fell less than an hour after being hit and took twelve seconds to reach the ground.”

    4. "larger collapse of this building", "collapsing" is proper term

    5."The Government would like to have it be believed that this was a terrorist attack carried out by men living in caves half a world away, but unfortunately, the truth is a little closer to home then what they have led us to believe. The government was involved in these heinous acts and it will be proven."

    Try the one below, seems bit more polished.

    "The Government machine that has already led us into a propagated war, Vietnam, & provided terrorist with arms, Iran-Contra Affair, would like you to take this attack at face value. What could be easier than putting the responsibility on highly propagated men in caves half way around the world? The truth is, this government war machine has more than failed to prevent these attacks, they were the ones who masterminded them"

    ^

    I changed "it" to "them" after masterminded if you got the version before this reply.

    Lot of text between 5 & 6, just glanced over it, seems good, make sure there aren't too many commas tho.

    6. Only days after Kevin Ryan wrote this letter, he is fired from his position at Underwriters Laboratories (Loose Change, 38:17).

    "he was fired" is the correct way, did you copy & paste that from a site, it seems like a commentary-documentary themed statement. Anyway "was" is right.

    7. Kevin’s statement is not the only proof that buildings of that type will not melt and collapse from fire.

    This is better. Restates your thesis, and much stronger.

    Asides from Mr. Ryan's convincing testimony, there is much more evidence to support the truth that World Trade Center 1 & 2 weren't leveled by a simple fire.

    Source(s): 4 years of writing my friends high school essay's for money.
    • Login to reply the answers
  • 3 years ago

    good, it is dependent. quite often I'd say early, but when the predicament was once, say, running right into a constructing with a bomb rigged to head off, I'd as a substitute be overdue so i do not get the sh*t blown outta me!

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.