Originally posted by: rahvin
Originally posted by: MadRat
Before the first collapse, why does the building next to the North Tower - building WT6 - suddenly go up in a giant plume BEFORE the tower falls? That has always bothered me, And then go look at the post-catastrophe images of WT6 - there is a gigantic hole down the middle of the whole building as if it exploded - and its largely just the outside frame left standing. Strange that a nick by the collapsing tower above makes the center of the building blow outward and up. We'll just ignore WT7, too, for arguments sake.
I don't know what you are talking about, I never saw a building go up in flames before the collapse but I wouldn't be supprised if one had, as flaming debris left both towers after the impact of the planes (and after falling 50 stories it would have hit other buildings with sufficient force to penetrate the structure). The collapse of WT5 was of much more importance (a much more substantial fire and severe heat deformation of the structural steel) as 6 took a substantial debris hit from tower one with debris pentrating to the basement and knocking the entire centre of the building out. There is an entire chapter devoted to 3,5 and 6 and a seperate chapter devoted to 7.
Newsflash: I didn't write the WTC report, a very experienced team of designers and forensics engineers did. But you did give me a pretty good laugh. :thumbsup:Originally posted by: bigdog1218
I would take the word of a firefighter whos sole job is working with fire over a snot nosed civil like you. Not saying I agree with this whole conspiracy thing, but stop spewing all this I know thermo and I'm the god of science and I'm better than everyone in this thread. You're a civil, you're barely an engineer yourself.
Originally posted by: bigdog1218
If the firefighters want to look at the steel, why not let them? Maybe they finding something new, maybe they don't.
And what are they going to learn from it? What this is about is a bunch of firefighters that aren't getting the lime light for the investigation. They have their panties in a bunch because they didn't get to participate and they can't sell their FDNY shirts and hats along with their big press conferences saying they "analyized the steel" using their firefighter powers. Boo hoo, I feel so sorry for them. If they want to analyze the steel they can buy the scrap just like anyone else.
Originally posted by: Aelius
In other words you cannot answer a simple question.
You haven't asked a simple question that isn't answered in the report (or isn't the most obvious answer), and you would know that if you had bothered to read it. I do understand, the document, outside the executive summary, is highly techinical and those big words like kips, joules, truss and the framing diagrams confuse and confound you so you do the best thing you can do which is make comments about professional engineers getting their degrees from cerel boxes. I'm sure everyone who reads it thinks you are just the most incredibly intelligent person they have ever seen, no wait they don't.
Thanks for giving me a good laugh guys, I was smiling for a couple hours after reading your attempted insults.
You don't need an engineering degree to smell bullsh!t. That's why I asked a simple question. You couldn't, wouldn't provide it. Instead you continue to attempt to discredit and play it off.
Why don't you just answer the simple question asked. If the increadibly hot burning fuel melted the joints and other supports like bolts etc and turned them into effectively melted butter then how could people be standing in the middle of the crash within a few minutes? Did that melting metal and heat just move downward and had no similar heat effect on the people standing around in the wreckage or the supports/joints/bolts and other materials above the impact site?
I call bullsh!t.