• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Fire - not explosives - brought 7 WTC down on 9/11, says report

Page 10 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc-
see if u can find a vid of a building falling down (not controlled demolition) with that same sequencial "air puff" pattern from down to up.
I don't rely on videos to formulate an opinion because a photo or video often doesn't provide all of the facts or tell the whole story. Videos are open to interpretation. In fact, videos can be misleading.

Unfortunately, videos seem to be your primary source of coming to any sort of conclusion about 9/11. Well, that, and tenuous associations that don't prove anything.
 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
Originally posted by: event8horizon
this guy claims that there was a "countdown" concerning wtc7
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STbD9XMCOho

Earlier this year, we reported on the testimony of an anonymous EMT named Mike who told Loose Change producer Dylan Avery that hundreds of emergency rescue personnel were told over bullhorns that Building 7, a 47 story skyscraper adjacent the twin towers that was not hit by a plane yet imploded symmetrically later in the afternoon on 9/11, was about to be "pulled" and that a 20 second radio countdown preceded its collapse.

That account was backed up by another ground zero rescue worker who went on the record with her full name. Volunteer EMT Indira Singh described to a radio show how she learned that WTC 7 was going to be "brought down" and the context was clear that it was to be deliberately demolished.

In addition, former NYPD officer Craig Bartmer described hearing bombs tear down the building as he fled the collapse.
In a taped interview with us after the event, McPadden made it clear that he and onlookers clearly heard "three, two, one" from the radio before the building collapsed. We will be releasing that tape over the next week. We also talked to other first responders who verified the story.

McPadden's account, when added to the testimony of other first responders, clearly suggests that officials knew the building was about to be brought down in a planned demolition, and that they made a conscious effort or were ordered to hide that fact from the first responders, though at the very end onlookers were given a brief warning which enabled them to escape safely.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/ar...molition_countdown.htm
FDNY knew the building was coming down because it showed signs of collapse, that's what hundreds of firefighters testified to. This was at about 2 pm.

9/11 was a confusing day. I was at school and I heard the following from people:
- Planes accidently flew into the Twin Towers.
- Planes intentionally hit the Twin Towers.
- Planes hit the Pentagon
- Planes hit the White House
- Planes hit the Capitol Building.
- Car bombs in DC
- Car bombs in NYC
- Anthrax in NYC
- Nuclear contamination

I'm not kidding. I heard all of that in Boston, at school, from people who were checking the news around the clock.

At Ground Zero there was infinitely more confusion. People heard (and said) all sorts of things, but the point is that there is no evidence in hindsight that there were bombs. I believe that people heard there was a bomb inside WTC 7, but that doesn't mean that it's true. It's the same as what I listed above, some of it's true, some of it isn't.

If you're going to throw out every single argument I've given you and ultimately believe that the fact that a small group of people heard there was a bomb, you're absolutely hopeless.

You claimed you were a truth seeker, but you have no ability to process the truth because you're so knee-deep in your own conspiracy. You've implicated everyone from the FDNY to Larry Silverstein to Israel to Iran and yet provided no compelling motive for any of their cover-ups or how they even assisted in taking down the WTC.

I've raised questions about the evidence you provide (example: The FDNY are not demolitions experts in the slightest, so why would they be the ones telling people the buildings are coming down or receiving orders from Silverstein to destroy the building?) I've tried to show you that every single youtube video you point lacks credibility for one of the following reasons: they are taken out of context or otherwise distorted (see "squib" video), they have no context (explosions video), they represent things that aren't true (assistant professor whoever, who doesn't exist).

I've laid out a mountain of evidence for you to climb and instead of doing so you've slammed your fingers in your ears and are now screaming until you're blue in the face.

You truthers are all the same.
 

event8horizon

Senior member
Nov 15, 2007
674
0
0
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc-
see if u can find a vid of a building falling down (not controlled demolition) with that same sequencial "air puff" pattern from down to up.
I don't rely on videos to formulate an opinion because a photo or video often doesn't provide all of the facts or tell the whole story. Videos are open to interpretation. In fact, videos can be misleading.

Unfortunately, videos seem to be your primary source of coming to any sort of conclusion about 9/11. Well, that, and tenuous associations that don't prove anything.

so u like hardcore evidence such as the fema sample 1 from wtc 7. i like the way u think tlc!!

"Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfication with subsequent intragranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel."

Summary for Sample 1
1. The thinning of the steel occurred by a high-temperture corrosion due to a combination of oxidation and sulfidation.

2. Heating of the steel into a hot corrosive environment approaching 1,000 °C (1,800 °F) results in the formation of a eutectic mixture of iron, oxygen, and sulfur that liquefied the steel.

3. The sulfidation attack of steel grain boundaries accelerated the corrosion and erosion of the steel.
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: event8horizon
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc-
see if u can find a vid of a building falling down (not controlled demolition) with that same sequencial "air puff" pattern from down to up.
I don't rely on videos to formulate an opinion because a photo or video often doesn't provide all of the facts or tell the whole story. Videos are open to interpretation. In fact, videos can be misleading.

Unfortunately, videos seem to be your primary source of coming to any sort of conclusion about 9/11. Well, that, and tenuous associations that don't prove anything.

so u like hardcore evidence such as the fema sample 1 from wtc 7. i like the way u think tlc!!

"Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfication with subsequent intragranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel."

Summary for Sample 1
1. The thinning of the steel occurred by a high-temperture corrosion due to a combination of oxidation and sulfidation.

2. Heating of the steel into a hot corrosive environment approaching 1,000 °C (1,800 °F) results in the formation of a eutectic mixture of iron, oxygen, and sulfur that liquefied the steel.

3. The sulfidation attack of steel grain boundaries accelerated the corrosion and erosion of the steel.
I like hardcore evidence that is scrutinized by engineers and experts. Since the FEMA and NIST engineers and experts apparently decided that the two anomolous samples they found of the steel were not of any real consequence or relevance in regard to the collapse, and therefore didn't dwell on them, I'll acept their word over the word of some anonymous dude on the internet who doesn't appear to have much education in either engineering or metallurgy.

iow, you keep regurgitating this information about the steel over and over and over and I doubt that you have the slightest idea what any of it means whatsoever.
 

event8horizon

Senior member
Nov 15, 2007
674
0
0
beuu-
from your post-
"You claimed you were a truth seeker, but you have no ability to process the truth because you're so knee-deep in your own conspiracy. You've implicated everyone from the FDNY to Larry Silverstein to Israel to Iran and yet provided no compelling motive for any of their cover-ups or how they even assisted in taking down the WTC."
well if there was a countdown, then find out who was in charge of it. thats not for me to do now is it. i never stated fdny was in on a conspiracy. the fireman said there was a bomb in the building and to clear. find that guy and ask him. i cant do that now can i. as for car bombs and anthrax, well u may want to researh the weehawkan n.j. warehouse where urban movers were operating out of. as i said before, larry might not of known what was going on. like u said, pull it could of meant something else. hook the man up to a lie dector and end it once and for all. and how the hell have i implicated iran into this!!!!! lol. motive to cover up -national security.

 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
Originally posted by: event8horizon
beuu-
from your post-
"You claimed you were a truth seeker, but you have no ability to process the truth because you're so knee-deep in your own conspiracy. You've implicated everyone from the FDNY to Larry Silverstein to Israel to Iran and yet provided no compelling motive for any of their cover-ups or how they even assisted in taking down the WTC."
well if there was a countdown, then find out who was in charge of it. thats not for me to do now is it. i never stated fdny was in on a conspiracy. the fireman said there was a bomb in the building and to clear. find that guy and ask him. i cant do that now can i. as for car bombs and anthrax, well u may want to researh the weehawkan n.j. warehouse where urban movers were operating out of. as i said before, larry might not of known what was going on. like u said, pull it could of meant something else. hook the man up to a lie dector and end it once and for all. and how the hell have i implicated iran into this!!!!! lol. motive to cover up -national security.
What questions are you going to ask Larry? He had nothing to gain from being involved in 9/11.

As for the rest of your evidence, you're clinging to two individuals who make claims that clearly arose from the confusion surrounding the WTC on 9/11. There is no evidence for bombs. You've found nothing to prove any of your points, just a bunch of out-of-context or deliberately misleading videos while you've ignored the mountains of evidence against everything you've said.

 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Administrator
Mar 5, 2001
49,606
162
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I like hardcore evidence that is scrutinized by engineers and experts. Since the FEMA and NIST engineers and experts apparently decided that the two anomolous samples they found of the steel were not of any real consequence or relevance in regard to the collapse, and therefore didn't dwell on them, I'll acept their word over the word of some anonymous dude on the internet who doesn't appear to have much education in either engineering or metallurgy.

iow, you keep regurgitating this information about the steel over and over and over and I doubt that you have the slightest idea what any of it means whatsoever.
If you're going to start the list, let's keep it growing:
engineering, metallurgy, architecture, chemistry, physics...
 

event8horizon

Senior member
Nov 15, 2007
674
0
0
Originally posted by: DrPizza
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I like hardcore evidence that is scrutinized by engineers and experts. Since the FEMA and NIST engineers and experts apparently decided that the two anomolous samples they found of the steel were not of any real consequence or relevance in regard to the collapse, and therefore didn't dwell on them, I'll acept their word over the word of some anonymous dude on the internet who doesn't appear to have much education in either engineering or metallurgy.

iow, you keep regurgitating this information about the steel over and over and over and I doubt that you have the slightest idea what any of it means whatsoever.
If you're going to start the list, let's keep it growing:
engineering, metallurgy, architecture, chemistry, physics...
pizza man, here is what fema had to say about that:

1. Suggestions for Future Research
The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown. It is possible that this is the result of long-term heating in the ground following the collapse of the buildings. It is also possible that the phenomenon started prior to collapse and accelerated the weakening of the steel structure. A detailed study into the mechanisms of this phenomenon is needed to determine what risk, if any, is presented to existing steel structures exposed to severe and long-burning fires.

hummm, could have started prior to the collapse. the only thing the nist did was to wave a pen and say that none of that molten metal eyewittnesses saw or melted steel (which this sample shows) had anything to do with the collapse. did the nist do any "lab" experiments to test what would cause this. not any i know of. just like beau said about that liquid aluminum i linked that did not resemble that crap pouring out of the wtc, make it into a lab experiment. hell, i read frank greenings article and he couldnt even do it!!!
 

PottedMeat

Lifer
Apr 17, 2002
12,365
471
126
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Here ya go, event8horizon. In this paper demolition experts independently assess the possibility of explosives or demolitions being used and come to the conclusion that it was not possible.

http://www.implosionworld.com/...s%20of%209-8-06%20.pdf
You should just stop. He's already got a jigsaw puzzle of how everything connects to 911 in his head and if the pieces don't fit he'll just ignore it and find something else to jam in there.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
18
81
OMG you guys! Last night there were bombs in the sky! I didn't see them but it was raining and I kept hearing these explosions. I think the terrorists are using some sort of signal system because a few seconds before the explosions there'd be these huge flashes of light across the sky! And then BOOM! I mean, what else could it be but bombs? I even heard some guy say it sounds like there's bombs going off!
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
A very appropriate comic for this thread: http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/B...11/Dilbert20070224.gif
Ahhh, but you see, it's not really a dead horse. It's an opossum crafted by Bush's (in coordination with Mossad) super-secret cadre of genetics research scientists (of which many are Israeli, hmmm) to look just like a horse. When nobody is looking, it will get up and gallop away because Bush and his Zionist cohorts in crime are tricky like that.
 

dphantom

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2005
4,512
141
106
You know, this whole thread and te other one remind me of the conspiray theorists who say we never landed and walked on the moon. They ignore everything factual and twist out of context any ambiguity, plus laud as fact that which is pure supposition from people who simply are not qualified to render an expert opinion.

Everyone has an opinion, but I will listen to experts at NIST and FEMA before some junior architect who builds gyms for a living or anyone else these WTC CT people throw out as being experts.
 

event8horizon

Senior member
Nov 15, 2007
674
0
0
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Here ya go, event8horizon. In this paper demolition experts independently assess the possibility of explosives or demolitions being used and come to the conclusion that it was not possible.

http://www.implosionworld.com/...s%20of%209-8-06%20.pdf

no where in that article did i find anything about that sample and what it would imply.

but he did say:
"We do not know exactly how or why WTC 7 fell when it did, and we decline to hypothesize here. All we can offer is that, from a demolition and structural failure standpoint, available data does not rule out the possibility of the building collapsing as a direct result of the structural conditions detailed above."

hummmmm, didnt even mention that sample???? come on tlc

 

event8horizon

Senior member
Nov 15, 2007
674
0
0
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
A very appropriate comic for this thread: http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/B...11/Dilbert20070224.gif
Ahhh, but you see, it's not really a dead horse. It's an opossum crafted by Bush's (in coordination with Mossad) super-secret cadre of genetics research scientists (of which many are Israeli, hmmm) to look just like a horse. When nobody is looking, it will get up and gallop away because Bush and his Zionist cohorts in crime are tricky like that.

:laugh:
 

event8horizon

Senior member
Nov 15, 2007
674
0
0
Originally posted by: dphantom
You know, this whole thread and te other one remind me of the conspiray theorists who say we never landed and walked on the moon. They ignore everything factual and twist out of context any ambiguity, plus laud as fact that which is pure supposition from people who simply are not qualified to render an expert opinion.

Everyone has an opinion, but I will listen to experts at NIST and FEMA before some junior architect who builds gyms for a living or anyone else these WTC CT people throw out as being experts.

heres what fema had to say:
1. Suggestions for Future Research
The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown. It is possible that this is the result of long-term heating in the ground following the collapse of the buildings. It is also possible that the phenomenon started prior to collapse and accelerated the weakening of the steel structure. A detailed study into the mechanisms of this phenomenon is needed to determine what risk, if any, is presented to existing steel structures exposed to severe and long-burning fires.

the nist wrote it off without trying to figure out what caused it or recreating the conditions which created "liquid" steel.

have u seen a detailed study from nist or fema concerning this????
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
18
81
I have one question:

If you've got this all figured out....why are you still alive?? They can bring down a skyscraper with secret explosives, fire a missile in midday and somehow get dozens of people to claim they saw a plane, haul in tons of wreckage to strew about the site to make it look like a real plane crash, but they can't kill the one person who figured out all their plans? You're very good.
 
Dec 10, 2005
21,288
2,880
126
Originally posted by: jonks
I have one question:

If you've got this all figured out....why are you still alive?? They can bring down a skyscraper with secret explosives, fire a missile in midday and somehow get dozens of people to claim they saw a plane, haul in tons of wreckage to strew about the site to make it look like a real plane crash, but they can't kill the one person who figured out all their plans? You're very good.
Because killing him would confirm to everyone that he was right... duh!
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
18
81
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: jonks
I have one question:

If you've got this all figured out....why are you still alive?? They can bring down a skyscraper with secret explosives, fire a missile in midday and somehow get dozens of people to claim they saw a plane, haul in tons of wreckage to strew about the site to make it look like a real plane crash, but they can't kill the one person who figured out all their plans? You're very good.
Because killing him would confirm to everyone that he was right... duh!
That's why they'd make it look like an accident. By dropping a plane on his house or something equally inconspicuous.
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Administrator
Mar 5, 2001
49,606
162
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
Originally posted by: event8horizon
Originally posted by: DrPizza
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I like hardcore evidence that is scrutinized by engineers and experts. Since the FEMA and NIST engineers and experts apparently decided that the two anomolous samples they found of the steel were not of any real consequence or relevance in regard to the collapse, and therefore didn't dwell on them, I'll acept their word over the word of some anonymous dude on the internet who doesn't appear to have much education in either engineering or metallurgy.

iow, you keep regurgitating this information about the steel over and over and over and I doubt that you have the slightest idea what any of it means whatsoever.
If you're going to start the list, let's keep it growing:
engineering, metallurgy, architecture, chemistry, physics...
pizza man, here is what fema had to say about that:

1. Suggestions for Future Research
The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown. It is possible that this is the result of long-term heating in the ground following the collapse of the buildings. It is also possible that the phenomenon started prior to collapse and accelerated the weakening of the steel structure. A detailed study into the mechanisms of this phenomenon is needed to determine what risk, if any, is presented to existing steel structures exposed to severe and long-burning fires.

hummm, could have started prior to the collapse. the only thing the nist did was to wave a pen and say that none of that molten metal eyewittnesses saw or melted steel (which this sample shows) had anything to do with the collapse. did the nist do any "lab" experiments to test what would cause this. not any i know of. just like beau said about that liquid aluminum i linked that did not resemble that crap pouring out of the wtc, make it into a lab experiment. hell, i read frank greenings article and he couldnt even do it!!!
edit: why do I bother. I drove by a guy with a sign that said "the end is near." That time, I knew that no matter what I said to him, I wouldn't be able to convince him otherwise. There have been looneys holding those same signs for millenia. People have long ago learned to just point and laugh (else lock them up in an insane asylum & throw away the key.) Why is it so hard to learn that lesson online? Just point and laugh.
 

dphantom

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2005
4,512
141
106
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: jonks
I have one question:

If you've got this all figured out....why are you still alive?? They can bring down a skyscraper with secret explosives, fire a missile in midday and somehow get dozens of people to claim they saw a plane, haul in tons of wreckage to strew about the site to make it look like a real plane crash, but they can't kill the one person who figured out all their plans? You're very good.
Because killing him would confirm to everyone that he was right... duh!
That's why they'd make it look like an accident. By dropping a plane on his house or something equally inconspicuous.
Nope, gotta disagree with you there Jonks. Bush, the Jews, Zionists, Haliburton would divert an asteroid. That would really cover up all the evidence. :laugh:
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
101,626
5,923
126
Originally posted by: ElFenix
the pentagon attack was clearly space aliens who flew into the side of the pentagon, scraping light poles and the ground deliberately, and then brain washing everyone into thinking it was an airliner they saw. the videos would disprove this because the aliens didn't recognize our simple technology for what it was. that is why they videos haven't been released.

prove me wrong.
i see that no one has refuted me. so obviously i am right. the FEMA and NIST reports were wrong. event8horizon is wrong as well. it was aliens.
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: event8horizon
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Here ya go, event8horizon. In this paper demolition experts independently assess the possibility of explosives or demolitions being used and come to the conclusion that it was not possible.

http://www.implosionworld.com/...s%20of%209-8-06%20.pdf

no where in that article did i find anything about that sample and what it would imply.

but he did say:
"We do not know exactly how or why WTC 7 fell when it did, and we decline to hypothesize here. All we can offer is that, from a demolition and structural failure standpoint, available data does not rule out the possibility of the building collapsing as a direct result of the structural conditions detailed above."

hummmmm, didnt even mention that sample???? come on tlc
Nowhere did I claim they mentioned that stupid fucking sample that you dote on as if it's the holy grail. Don't you get it? It's just an anomaly, one FEMA can't fully explain, one NIST doesn't even bother to explain because they obviously feel it's not relevant to why the towers came down, and one you can't even begin to explain one bit. Yet you keep trotting it out as some shing example. WTF is it an example of? It doesn't mean anything. It's about as stupid an argument as a creationist doting on transitional fossils. Despite ALL the other evidence, evidence you completely ignore, you hold firm to your own little transitional fossil.

I doubt you even bothered to read the article I linked very closely at all. It gave many reasons why the towers could not have been and were not demolition jobs. But you ignore all those reasons and focus on two small chunks of steel. That's not being smart, that's being fucking pigheaded and purposefully ignorant. Why you want to appear on the internet in such a manner is baffling. I guess it's the anonymity, because surely you wouldn't let people know you're that stupid in real life.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY