Skip to main content
  • CNSNews.com
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • TimesWatch
  • Take Action!

Join Us @:
Facebook
Twitter
Amazon Kindle

Tell the Truth campaign logo
NewsBusters.org logo

February 11, 2012
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • Account
  • RSS
Home » Blogs » Lynn Davidson's blog
  • Barbara Walters, Shameless Hypocrite: Hits Kennedy Mistress for Greed, Tells Her She Should Have Stayed Quiet
  • NY Times Writers Rush to Obama's Defense Like It's Their Job
  • Rachel Maddow Trumpets Inane 'Amish Bus Driver' Analogy for Obama Contraception Rule
  • MRC's Bozell Scolds Media's Reluctance to Cover HHS Birth Control Mandate
  • Chris Matthews Excoriates: Rick Santorum Is a 'Theocrat' and Franklin Graham Is a 'Disgrace'
  • Time's Mark Halperin Concedes: GOP 'Would Be Creamed' by Media for Not Passing a Budget
  • CNN Reporters Call CPAC a ‘Conservative Petri Dish’
  • Chris Matthews Reacts to JFK Mistress: Kennedy a Hero Who 'Still Arouses the Country'

'Popular Mechanics' Answers Rosie O'Donnell's Challenge to 9/11 Experts

By Lynn Davidson | March 31, 2007 | 10:27

Change font size:  A |  A
sdfd

So far, no Ivy League profs have responded to Rosie O'Donnell's royal command for an explanation from physics experts,but scientific mag “Popular Mechanics” did in their March 30 article. They don't wear elbow-patched tweed coats, but hopefully she will consider them authoritative. Last week, while discussing her pet 9/11 conspiracy theories, Rosie O’Donnell issued an imperial demand that someone “(g)et a physics expert here from Yale, from Harvard. Pick the school!” to explain how, in addition to other wacky ideas, “for the first time in history, steel was melted by fire,” causing World Trade Center Tower Seven to mysteriously collapse.

Presumably, she’s too busy to do the simple fact-finding herself, which is strange, because she isn’t new to using search engines to uncover information (“Google it! “). Newsbusters’ covered it here, and I wrote about her blog that continues these fantasies. The respected magazine penned a brief response to her main theories and tossed some cold reality on her wild rantings, laying them out numerically and focusing on her main claims (emphasis mine):

The implication that, unlike the Twin Towers, WTC7 did not have any external structural damage is addressed, partially with findings by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, or NIST :

Initial reports from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) misunderstood the amount of damage the 47-floor WTC7 sustained from the debris of the falling North Tower—because in early photographs, WTC7 was obscured by smoke and debris.

…After further studies, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) told PM that debris from the 110-floor North Tower hit WTC7 with the force of a volcanic eruption. Nearly a quarter of the building was carved away over the bottom 10 stories on its south face, and significant damage was visible up to the 18th floor (see p. 24 of this report).

The unusual design of WTC7 is also crucial to the discussion, in that key columns supported extreme loads—as much as 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor—as the building straddled an electrical substation. “What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors,” NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder told PM, “it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down.” The tower wasn’t hit by a plane, but it was severely wounded by the collapse of the North Tower. Which is when the fires started

Now to Rosie’s main claims that the Twin Towers “got hit by planes” and her sardonic statement that WTC7 defied the laws of physics and “miraculously, the first time in history, steel was melted by fire." In contrast, PM stated that the Towers stood for “more than a half-hour after the impacts” and were brought down by raging fires, and WTC7 was weakened by fire:

The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center weren’t knocked down by planes—they both stood for more than a half-hour after the impacts. But the crashes destroyed support columns and ignited infernos that ultimately weakened—not melted—the steel structures until the towers could no longer support their own weights (NIST offers a primer here). Ms. O’Donnell fundamentally misstates the case with her use of the word “melting”: Evidence currently points to WTC7 also collapsing because fires weakened its ravaged steel structure.

PM described the fuel tanks located throughout the building (for the in-house emergency command center) that continuously fed the fires as they raged for seven hours weakening the underlying structure before the inevitable collapse.

Tower 7 housed the city’s emergency command center, so there were a number of fuel tanks located throughout the building—including two 6000-gal. tanks in the basement that fed some generators in the building by pressurized lines. “Our working hypothesis is that this pressurized line was supplying fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time,” according to Sunder. Steel melts at about 2,750 degrees Fahrenheit—but it loses strength at temperatures as low as 400 F. When temperatures break 1000 degrees F, steel loses nearly 50 percent of its strength. It is unknown what temperatures were reached inside WTC7, but fires in the building raged for seven hours before the collapse.

Rosie believes WTC7 was “pulled” or brought down with explosives. PM asked demolition experts who stated that her theory presents “insurmountable logistical challenges,” and instead PM pointed to a “clear-cut engineering explanation” for how and “why the building fell the way it did.” With the south face "heavily damaged," the other columns were "overtaxed," when "weakened columns failed."

We’ll have to see if Rosie addresses this article, and if she does, whether she chooses hard facts and science over the shrewd editing, misrepresentations and fanciful imaginations of the Truthers.

“Popular Mechanics” dealt with many of the 9/11 conspiracies in its 2006 book, “Debunking 9/11 Myths.”

Share this
  • 9/11
  • Conspiracy Theories
  • Rosie O'Donnell
  • Lynn Davidson's blog
  • Login or register to post comments
  • Printer-friendly version
Donate to NewsBusters

Donate to NewsBusters Today!

This form needs Javascript to display, which your browser doesn't support. Sign up here instead

User Shortcuts

Log in

  • My account
  • My buddylist
  • Log in to check messages
  • RSS feed
  • About NB
  • Contact us
  • Jobs
  • Advertise on NB

 

 

 

  • The cynical and self-contradictory Gospel of Obama (Krauthammer)
  • Video: Protesters at CPAC admit they're being paid to protest (Daily Caller)
  • Does the drug 'ella' cause abortions? (Weekly Standard)
  • Does income inequality cause global warming? (Power Line)
  • Jay Carney gets snippy about Super PACs (Verum Serum)
  • Where are the blacks for Roland Martin? (NRO/Media Blog)
  • Turkish Islamists turn church into mosque (Commentary)

RSS FeedAmazon KindleFacebookTwitter

Try a Sweater Vest, Mitt
more cartoons
NewsBusters

Executive Editor
Matthew Sheffield

Editor at Large
Brent Baker

Senior Editors
Tim Graham
Rich Noyes

Managing Editor
Ken Shepherd

Associate Editor
Noel Sheppard

Contributing Editors
Tom Blumer
Geoffrey Dickens
Dan Gainor
David Limbaugh
Lachlan Markay
Mithridate Ombud
Clay Waters
Scott Whitlock

Senior Contributor
Mark Finkelstein

Editorial Associate
Aubrey Vaughan

Contributing Writers
Matthew Balan
Michael M. Bates
Erin R. Brown
Jack Coleman
Kyle Drennen
Douglas Ernst
P. J. Gladnick
Stephen Gutowski
Matt Hadro
D. S. Hube
Kathleen McKinley
Dave Pierre
Amy Ridenour
Julia A. Seymour
Terry Trippany
Rusty Weiss
Brad Wilmouth

Publisher
Brent Bozell

Site Design
Dialog New Media

  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • Account
  • rss
  • CNSNews
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • Take Action!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Amazon Kindle
  • Advertise
  • Jobs

Copyright © 2005-2012 NewsBusters. Terms of Use.