What brought down WTC7

[LunarRay]

Except that "complicity" argument becomes circular because you then have to take into consideration all the people involved, show proof that the towers were demolished, etc. - something has has never been close to being proven. So there's more than complicity involved, there's common sense, considering the entire picture, and taking all of the known facts into consideration. When you do that there is no basis for the complicity argument. Common sense and science argues othrwise.

That is the rub! It's not like some bit of evidence wipes out the NIST hypothesis but there is smoke...
I can't get past the airplanes and the people on board them. Where the heck did they go. But, on that issue is the missing plane bits. As I understand it not one body of a plane passenger or crew has been found at any of the sites... They found the Shuttle bits and crew and it did explode!...

 

[Number1]

I think a little comic relief is in order here. I found this gem in another thread. We almost lost kyle for a while.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fern
Please stop derailing this thread with WTC and 'truther' stuff immediately.

Kyle's response to fern's post:

Please note that I was not the one who brought 9/11 into this thread, I previously suggested that WTC7 discussion should go in the appropriate thread, and I only kept responding here because this is where the arguments were being made.

Fern's response:

I said "stop posting about WTC7", I didn't say stop unless you wanna defend yourself or explain why you posted about it etc.

If I see the word "WTC7" or anything like it in one of your posts in this thread again you'll be vacationed faster then that building fell. "Stop" means stop.

Fern
Super Moderator

The moderator's patience is wearing thin. Keep it up Kyle.

 

[JEDIYoda]

so what exactly happenned to the trans-warp portal that was under WTC7???
Somebody told me...well it might have been Kylebisme that it was trucked to area 51....hmmmm

 

[LunarRay]

so what exactly happenned to the trans-warp portal that was under WTC7???
Somebody told me...well it might have been Kylebisme that it was trucked to area 51....hmmmm

They tried to drive it in a van across the George Washington Bridge but got caught... brought it back with the billions in Gold and put that trans-warp portal under the rubble of WTC7 and set it on fire... they found it all melted and stuff weeks later... Along with its propellent... Active Thermate.

 

[JEDIYoda]

They tried to drive it in a van across the George Washington Bridge but got caught... brought it back with the billions in Gold and put that trans-warp portal under the rubble of WTC7 and set it on fire... they found it all melted and stuff weeks later... Along with its propellent... Active Thermate.
__________________

well thanks for clearing that up for me..just goes to show sometimes those conspiracy theories do not even hold water!!

 

[LunarRay]

well thanks for clearing that up for me..just goes to show sometimes those conspiracy theories do not even hold water!!

Speaking of Conspiracy Theories, did you hear the one about the Government having secured intergalactic transport for Two Boeing 757's and Two 767's... via the Bermuda Triangle. Not sure what that is all about but... now get this... Some one of the alleged passengers placed a cell call to some Government Lawyer from Andromeda... No bout a doubt it either... it is on tape! I think CNN will have a story on it as soon as the embedded journalist can arraigned transport...

 

[OCGuy]

I just want to pop in to say......


LOL @ truthers.

 

[LunarRay]

I just want to pop in to say......


LOL @ truthers.

Welcome in.. hurry back! We love humor too.

 

[Number1]

I don't know if this was already been posted in here but here it is.

It's good for a laugh.

9/11 Conspiracy Theories 'Ridiculous,' Al Qaeda Says

 

[Nemesis 1]

yOU DO RELIZE. That for a true truether that just confirms the conspirecy theories . As All good theorist believe 1 man controls all sides .

 

[ElFenix]

That is the rub! It's not like some bit of evidence wipes out the NIST hypothesis but there is smoke...
I can't get past the airplanes and the people on board them. Where the heck did they go. But, on that issue is the missing plane bits. As I understand it not one body of a plane passenger or crew has been found at any of the sites... They found the Shuttle bits and crew and it did explode!...

uh, they mapped out exactly where the passengers remains were found in the pentagon plane

 

[LunarRay]

uh, they mapped out exactly where the passengers remains were found in the pentagon plane

As I've said, I don't have an issue about the planes and who flew them but there are some pretty strange things going on about them and the folks aboard...

The Pentagon and the Field: The impact force of many many many aircraft impacts seems to always leave some rather large bits of plane and bodies. I'm speaking to accidents where the plane ran into a mountain at cruise speed not a falling plane do to an explosion cuz the terminal velocity factor would limit its speed to under 200 mph. As I recall from a Fluid Dynamics issue a falling human reaches terminal velocity of about 120 mph... Anyhow, engines have titanium bits in them but yet I don't see where they entered the Pentagon and where they ended up... Before the collapse the entry looked to be about 6 meters and windows where the wings would have impacted were not broken.... And, it takes, what... 3500c to melt titanium... They show the aux power gizmo as being evidence a plane was there... and some other bits..
But gee... the plane was going 450 mph...[another strange issue given ground dynamics at that speed] I'd have expected to see some rather large pieces of aircraft and some bodies not just stuff that may have been body parts and may have been from an airliner.
But, end of the day I'm not persuaded away from terroristic attack as put forth by NIST et al.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

For years the Towers seemed to be able to simply react as they did or as how NIST (first I heard of NIST is in recent years) said. But, then I looked at that bloc of building above the damage floors... and Newton's Third Law.... equal and opposite... that pulverization we see initially appears to be the upper bloc being ripped apart by something but at least by the lower portion... Best case for that 15 floor bloc is about 8 floors and it is totally gone... since all the crap is 'blown' out into the surrounding air there is nothing to continue to pound on the remaining floors... Either that or apples don't fall and if they do they ought to drive on to the middle of the Earth... or maybe only a few thousand kilometers or so... Guess Newton should have moved his head... or... did he break the apple?

Well, to be honest, not all of this is precisely measured to the T and there is nothing to contradict what is said except skepticism so unless someone can actually prove an alternative scenario, i'm not going to say anything more than that it probably happened the way it was told by officials.

Actually, i'll go so far as to say that the same goes for WTC7 until new evidence that contradict and offer a MORE CREDIBLE explanation than what has been given.

Besides, Newtons third law? Why?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

What makes you more qualified to decide how WTC 7 came down then the bunch of scientist at the national institute of science and technology who spent years studying the process? Just curious.

Absolutely nothing.

I do know how to level a structure without anyone being able to escape though and to click that you need equal structural damage.

That is not to say that THESE structures didn't have the effect where the opposite end held it together while the other end collapsed. It looks more like the lower bearings collapsed and shift in angle isn't something any larger building can stand.

There was quite a tad of lean in too which would support that.

I'm just fucking speculating here though, i thought we all were?

 

[Ozoned]

As I've said, I don't have an issue about the planes and who flew them but there are some pretty strange things going on about them and the folks aboard...

The Pentagon and the Field: The impact force of many many many aircraft impacts seems to always leave some rather large bits of plane and bodies. I'm speaking to accidents where the plane ran into a mountain at cruise speed not a falling plane do to an explosion cuz the terminal velocity factor would limit its speed to under 200 mph. As I recall from a Fluid Dynamics issue a falling human reaches terminal velocity of about 120 mph... Anyhow, engines have titanium bits in them but yet I don't see where they entered the Pentagon and where they ended up... Before the collapse the entry looked to be about 6 meters and windows where the wings would have impacted were not broken.... And, it takes, what... 3500c to melt titanium... They show the aux power gizmo as being evidence a plane was there... and some other bits..
But gee... the plane was going 450 mph...[another strange issue given ground dynamics at that speed] I'd have expected to see some rather large pieces of aircraft and some bodies not just stuff that may have been body parts and may have been from an airliner.
But, end of the day I'm not persuaded away from terroristic attack as put forth by NIST et al.

The thing I can't get pass is the fact that on sept.11, 2001 cell phones didn't work above 8000 feet. I believe Barbara Olson was at 40,000 feet when she talked to her husband. His original story was that she called from a cell phone, and then he changed his story to the seat back phones on the airplanes..... The flight that she was on did not have them.

I also can't understand why Nist did not follow their own basic structured methodology in investigating the events of 9/11.

Not saying things didn't occur by the action of the terrorists, as the governments official conspiracy theory suggests, just not sure who the terrorists are because the books have definately been cooked.

I will live long enough to get to see the real story about the uss liberty, but I am sure I will be long gone when the 9/11 stuff is declassified.

 

[LunarRay]

Besides, Newtons third law? Why?

Newton's third deals, as you know, with equal and opposite force... and speaking to the Towers and the bloc of building above the crash site... when it or they fell they impacted the floors and pulverized the concrete and I presume the steel was broken up... but that bloc also was broken up... equal and opposite.. so if the bottom bit was pulverized so was the top bit... until the top bit had no more bit to be a factor... that had to be no more than 15 floors if it pulverized 15 floors.. but at some point since all the stuff was 'blown' out there was nothing left to continue the crushing action...

 

[LunarRay]

The thing I can't get pass is the fact that on sept.11, 2001 cell phones didn't work above 8000 feet. I believe Barbara Olson was at 40,000 feet when she talked to her husband. His original story was that she called from a cell phone, and then he changed his story to the seat back phones on the airplanes..... The flight that she was on did not have them. I also can't understand why Nist did not follow their own basic structured methodology in investigating the events of 9/11. Not saying things didn't occur by the action of the terrorists, as the governments official conspiracy theory suggests, just not sure who the terrorists are because the books have definately been cooked. I will live long enough to get to see the real story about the uss liberty, but I am sure I will be long gone when the 9/11 stuff is declassified.

I read the bit quoted from the 20th high jacker... Mousoui.. or what ever... trial.. Now, I've not seen it myself... yet... but will.. in any event, the FBI is suppose to have said there were only 2 cell calls from that plane lasting 0 seconds... Teddy could clear this up by showing the seat back collect charge phone call... there were a few of them... and maybe two to him from her... I'd have used a seat back cuz I know they (cells) don't or didn't work at that altitude IF you could get to use them anyhow.. I was told not to turn them on even... So it is easy enough to sort that out... Barbara is the only one who mentions box cutters, at least from my readings... Now if or if not that aircraft had seat back phones.. I think they did even though some truther places say they didn't ... I think the sworn FBI statements or evidence in that trial would be persuasive.
I think and I mean think... that this issue is more of a quest to eliminate loose ends for me than to say it is a government conspiracy or not a terrorist act.. I just find so many things that can go both ways or seem to be able to... and that I can't move on using my own feet to dig up or get evidence one way or another on the evidence, that I'm flustered and want a real good ole fashion investigation...

WTC7 has always been an issue to me... I from the beginning felt it was someone lighting fires at SEC after the attacks that did that building... mainly cuz my sister worked there... and said.. stuff to me. I really really still think SEC was a target of someone... hehehehehheheheheh well... we know Enron was about to explode or had started to and others... Enron only needed time... to unwind stuff to survive... other 'clients' may not have had the wear-with-all to pull it off... maybe Worldcom... and a few others... But, Enron did go down anyhow so I guess no motive... maybe... that is.. maybe some evidence pointing elsewhere maybe got destroyed... maybe

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Newton's third deals, as you know, with equal and opposite force... and speaking to the Towers and the bloc of building above the crash site... when it or they fell they impacted the floors and pulverized the concrete and I presume the steel was broken up... but that bloc also was broken up... equal and opposite.. so if the bottom bit was pulverized so was the top bit... until the top bit had no more bit to be a factor... that had to be no more than 15 floors if it pulverized 15 floors.. but at some point since all the stuff was 'blown' out there was nothing left to continue the crushing action...

That's not right since structural force cannot be counted as equal to gravitational forces + acceleration?

Newtons third law is in effect at all times, this much we can agree on, but gravitational force + acceleration caused by gravitation makes the original explanation work all too well.

In a vaccum with equal force to the structural opposing force you'd be correct though, but that is an experiment withouth value.

Concrete isn't just set without armour, you use a proper net of steel armour and concrete doesn't just "blow away" from that armour even though it might once it's crushed to a point via acceleration + gravity.

I hate physics, i'm much more of a biologist or chemist or even a biochemist so indeed, correct me if i am wrong.

 

[LunarRay]

That's not right since structural force cannot be counted as equal to gravitational forces + acceleration? Newtons third law is in effect at all times, this much we can agree on, but gravitational force + acceleration caused by gravitation makes the original explanation work all too well. In a vaccum with equal force to the structural opposing force you'd be correct though, but that is an experiment withouth value. Concrete isn't just set without armour, you use a proper net of steel armour and concrete doesn't just "blow away" from that armour even though it might once it's crushed to a point via acceleration + gravity. I hate physics, i'm much more of a biologist or chemist or even a biochemist so indeed, correct me if i am wrong.

Hell, I don't know if you're wrong.. I only know what I think I know My forte is a science but it is a Social Science... we use the same earthly math to calculate stuff but not the same formula.. hehehehehhe. I can count stuff pretty good like. What I read about Newton makes sense... I think he was spot on.

The NISTY folks say the concrete was pulverized... It looks pulverized to me viewing the video and all of lower Manhattan had dust about a few inches deep which is said to be concrete... Three of my sisters had concrete dust on their property and none live all that far away from 'ground zero'.

My point is regarding the Towers: Regardless of the force the bloc exerted on the lower portion of those buildings there is an equal and opposite force exerted on the bloc. I calculated about 2.0 ish gjoules of energy (per the weight of stuff in the 15 floor block...) occurred upon the floor below the upper bit of building. It needed - again my estimation - about 230 mjoules of energy to pulverize that floor into 4 different size bits... from macro to micro to a bit larger.... Maybe I had 5. (Kyle, my gson, used his computer to determine this from what data I provided) When that meeting took place the concrete above met the same force ... equal and opposite.. Thus crushing and pulverizing that bloc's floor too... At some point in time the upper bloc ran out of mass and I estimate at a point no further down than 15 floors... One thing for sure it didn't appear atop the pile of rubble... no concrete stuff did.. and no pancakes either.

In any event, what don't make any sense at all to me regardless if the upper bloc remained in defiance of Newton's third or not... and that is; how the heck did the entire structure meet Earth so fast? Free Fall Acceleration of the tippity top would take some 10 seconds but this event with all the crushing would not have been able to free fall... each floor meeting would eliminate the ability for it to do so... IF you're kind you might say the event had to take over 20 seconds... or at least that is what I figure the fastest it could fall through the path of Greatest Resistance.
Watch the video and use a stop watch... how long did it take?.. One building took, from my view, about 12 seconds and the other - from memory - 10 or so... that can't be... so I must be wrong there... or right and the buildings didn't fall.. or something else is amiss...

Regarding the reinforcing stuff... this I do know about cuz the Engineering/Construction company that I was CFO/Controller of for a billion years... worked with that stuff... In the Towers they used mesh and #5 bar [5/8 inch]. IF you put enough pressure on that it will break loose and you'll be left with almost pristine steel.. Actually, run out to Kings Lynn and see some of the machines we sold them from DMI, a company we owned in the rebar fabrication business... hehehehe Made up in Skelmersdale. Heck, we even displayed how the rebar works to insure in concrete columns and it don't work to strengthen against lateral force very well.. But well enough, I guess...

I don't know what helped the collapse, if anything. Perhaps my stop watch is broken... but, I can't see that building doing what it did without some other factors involved... Termite infestation.. or something.

 

[Modelworks]

I watched the 9/11 program put out by national geographic last night, I recorded it months ago. They answered one by one the questions the truthers posed and backed it up with simulations and experiments. No matter what they did the truthers sat there claiming they were still right, it was a conspiracy. Every time the engineers provided them with data they discounted it and when asked about why the truthers responded with answers like "we don't know , uhm, that isn't for us to figure out, if they did a proper investigation we would know" . It was like talking to a wall.

Some of what they covered.
Building was a controlled demolition - no chance. The amount of explosives needed and the work to install them would have taken months and required access to parts of the building that nobody would have been able to cover up. Also there was no copper residue anywhere, which would have been seen had it used explosives to cut the steel.

Instead it was shown that steel doesn't have to reach a melting point. It merely needs to become softer. If you have a vertical support and you bend it even a couple inches then it will collapse from the weight. Once that started and the floors pancaked they gained momentum and fell downward and at an angle shifting the vertical supports as they fell. At that point the lower floors could have had the strongest steel ever made and it wouldn't matter as they were being pulled in directions the structure was not designed for.


Nano thermite - was supposedly painted on the beams. They did an experiment with a 2 foot long steel i-beam and placed 175lbs of commercial thermite on it and the beam was not destroyed. So this painted on thin layer stuff was supposed to be so good it is better than 175lbs of regular thermite ? Not scientifically possible.

The most compelling evidence for me is that for it to be a conspiracy you would have had to of had thousands of people involved. No way something like that stays secret for long.

 

[Modelworks]

In any event, what don't make any sense at all to me regardless if the upper bloc remained in defiance of Newton's third or not... and that is; how the heck did the entire structure meet Earth so fast?

Here is an experiment you can do that shows how it failed so fast. Take the center paper cylinder that is inside of paper towels. Place it vertical and push down on the top, that is just like the load on a vertical beam in a building. Now push on the side of the paper, just a little bit while still pushing down on the top. Watch how fast it collapses. Vertical supports are great as long as they remain perfectly vertical. Deflect them , even a little bit and they will fail.

 

[KlokWyze]

"truthers" lol, reminds of organized religion followers called people "pagans" or "athiests", with the condescending tone of course. I personally find people that rant, holler and rave about 9/11 being an inside job to be annoying, but if you were never @ least a little suspicious then you are retarded or didn't even bother to look into all the contradictions and fallacies.

BTW, an hour long History channel presentation, in no way, shape or form, could ever cover all the anomalies (in opposition to the NIST's version of the truth) on that day. Again, if you think so you are a an idiot.

I am not going to sit here and get into a flame war either. If you can't come up with your own opinion about many things, then you certainly couldn't about something as emotionally sensitive as this.

It doesn't take a genius to see that WTC7 wasn't brought down by minimal cosmetic damage done by falling debris on the SIDE of the building. LOL.

Now, if you'll excuse I'm going to go play Modern Warfare 2.

 

[LunarRay]

Here is an experiment you can do that shows how it failed so fast. Take the center paper cylinder that is inside of paper towels. Place it vertical and push down on the top, that is just like the load on a vertical beam in a building. Now push on the side of the paper, just a little bit while still pushing down on the top. Watch how fast it collapses. Vertical supports are great as long as they remain perfectly vertical. Deflect them , even a little bit and they will fail.

How about a more realistic test... cut 10% of that paper towel roll off the top... place the bottom part vertically and hold the 10% bit directly above it ... oh.. say 5 feet above it and let it drop on down to the bottom part... Did you notice anything... SCALE! You can't replicate with out scale. And nothing was pushing down on anything regarding the Towers. Gravity was pulling at it and all manner of structure was pushing up on it too... Apparently, there was more up then down for the longest time...

The only way to view this issue is to create a scale model or do a SIM. Either way the fastest the building can fall is Free Fall and through the path of greatest resistance takes quite a bit longer.

 

[LunarRay]

I watched the 9/11 program put out by national geographic last night, I recorded it months ago. They answered one by one the questions the truthers posed and backed it up with simulations and experiments. No matter what they did the truthers sat there claiming they were still right, it was a conspiracy. Every time the engineers provided them with data they discounted it and when asked about why the truthers responded with answers like "we don't know , uhm, that isn't for us to figure out, if they did a proper investigation we would know" . It was like talking to a wall.

Some of what they covered.
Building was a controlled demolition - no chance. The amount of explosives needed and the work to install them would have taken months and required access to parts of the building that nobody would have been able to cover up. Also there was no copper residue anywhere, which would have been seen had it used explosives to cut the steel.

Instead it was shown that steel doesn't have to reach a melting point. It merely needs to become softer. If you have a vertical support and you bend it even a couple inches then it will collapse from the weight. Once that started and the floors pancaked they gained momentum and fell downward and at an angle shifting the vertical supports as they fell. At that point the lower floors could have had the strongest steel ever made and it wouldn't matter as they were being pulled in directions the structure was not designed for.


Nano thermite - was supposedly painted on the beams. They did an experiment with a 2 foot long steel i-beam and placed 175lbs of commercial thermite on it and the beam was not destroyed. So this painted on thin layer stuff was supposed to be so good it is better than 175lbs of regular thermite ? Not scientifically possible.

The most compelling evidence for me is that for it to be a conspiracy you would have had to of had thousands of people involved. No way something like that stays secret for long.

I saw that National Geographic and Popular Mechanics thingi too... I was not informed by it. I liked the pool of fuel heating the beam with 3000lb on the center of it... I can't imagine a beam not bending or breaking as they constructed the examination... The other bit about Nano... they used normal thermate which is so different it again was interesting.. I'd expect exactly what I saw...
If there is any material difference in a test to what is alleged to have occurred then the test is not relevant to the allegation.

I get confused between National Geographic and Popular Mechanics.... Cept, I know Hearst owns PM and the NGSociety owns NG.. So, I'll have to go see which is the one I've in mind... anyhow, you need to have scientists at the table to discuss science not authors and producers...

I like to sit on the side lines watching both sides try to score a touchdown... they march up and down the field on offense and defense... The folks in the stands cheering and growning... hehehehehehe
We are speculating on stuff we probably don't have the horse sense to understand either way.. We choose sides cuz of bias usually or if we do have the science we become creative hoping no one will notice... hehehehe. I don't care if the Chargers win or loose... I don't get a thing if either event occurs... they do.. the players do... So where does your bias lay? Forget the number of folks that had to be involved... just focus on one item and watch both sides move that ball... :sneaky:

 

[kylebisme]

I took the release of MW2 as an excuse to ditch out on forums for a while, but now that I'm back:

uh, what towers talk?

My bad, I misunderstood your and Lunar's conversation there to be in regard to WTC2. Anyway, I'll go back and respond to it now:

why would it have necessarily tipped? it wasn't a solid mass, it was a barely connected heap of toothpicks.

and as a matter of fact the building came down all over the place. it's not visible in the youtube videos that certain posters want to rely on, but it did.

Lunar said "usually, not "necessarily", and he said so because enough asymmetrical damage to a bolted and welded steel frame structure will cause it to tip, and even a barely connected heap of toothpicks would tip notably more than WTC7 did. and the fact that it splattered out as it crushed does nothing to change that.

i've never denied that the facade didn't start drooping until after the interior had been collapsing for a while.

Not directly, but you suggest the interior having been collapsing for a while explains the free fall, even though the facade was only dropping until the moment the four corners of the building underwent free fall.

however, i see that there is a connection there between the two and hence one cannot be separated from the other.

Yet separating the two from each other is exactly what NIST did by claiming the support gave out in "stage 1" and then the roof line underwent free fall in "stage 2".

i didn't state anything of the sort. good going trying to straw man me..

I was trying to make sense of your comment "the NIST sim is the inside of the building, not the facade". If not to suggest the inside crumpled away frist allowing the facade to free fall, what was the intent of your comment?

you've yet to show any proof that the laws of physics state a part of a building collapsing under its own weight can't fall at or near free falls speeds for periods.

What part of my explanation in the OP are you having trouble with, or what standard of proof are you holding out for?

No matter what they did the truthers sat there claiming they were still right, it was a conspiracy. Every time the engineers provided them with data they discounted it and when asked about why the truthers responded with answers like "we don't know , uhm, that isn't for us to figure out, if they did a proper investigation we would know" . It was like talking to a wall.

That is because:

The producers of the National Geographic Channel assured us that they would air the evidence we highlighted for them on their show 9/11: Science and Conspiracy. They even showed us these segments in their "rough cut," which we were quite satisfied with. However, the final show aired none of our evidence, and they claimed that we had none.

Put simply, you got to see the debate framed by some falsers, so of course they made truthers out to be loons.

The other bit about Nano... they used normal thermate which is so different it again was interesting.. I'd expect exactly what I saw...

If they were trying to be objective at all, they would have at least loaded down the column they ignited thermite around with a bunch of weight like they did with the beam and the jet fuel. Instead, they made sure the column wouldn't fail by having it stand without any load, in a situation where even if the thermite was enough to turn the steel to the consistency of rubber it could have still stood. So they "taught" us that jet fuel burning at around 2000 fahrenheit can cause steel to fail, but not thermite burning much hotter.

The whole program was just one massive sham, a mockery of science. I watched it because a friend of mine thought it would be good, and it was that which inspired me to take a more proactive stance against the 9/11 cover up. Neither of us were beguiled by it in the slightest, but this article goes into more detail on the deceptions in the program for those who were.

I get confused between National Geographic and Popular Mechanics.... Cept, I know Hearst owns PM and the NGSociety owns NG..

Fox Cable Networks is half-owner of the National Geographic Channel.