What brought down WTC7

[event8horizon]

jediyoda-

the author was there at ground zero. this is "The Newsletter of the Structural Engineers Association of Utah". so are you saying you dont find it reputable?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: event8horizon
here is ONE point. not even sisson has been able to "corrode" 15.9 mm of steel in 8 days like the steel of wtc 7.

He's not able to corrode a perfectly healthy piece of beam in that time. However, that assumes the beam was perfectly healthy in the first place and that it wasn't already seriously corroded before it was exposed to the events on and post 9/11. Nothing in the report indicates that a completely healthy beam was in evidence in the first place. In fact, he brings up issues of acid rain and exposure to sea water in the report, something you have ignored as a possibility. But you are quick to make such assumptions and ignore anything to the contrary because doing so supports your view alone (whatever that view is, because you won't ever explain it).

Some truth seeker you are.

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: event8horizon
here is ONE point. not even sisson has been able to "corrode" 15.9 mm of steel in 8 days like the steel of wtc 7.

He's not able to corrode a perfectly healthy piece of beam in that time. However, that assumes the beam was perfectly healthy in the first place and that it wasn't already seriously corroded before it was exposed to the events on and post 9/11. Nothing in the report indicates that a completely healthy beam was in evidence in the first place. In fact, he brings up issues of acid rain and exposure to sea water in the report, something you have ignored as a possibility. But you are quick to make such assumptions and ignore anything to the contrary because doing so supports your view alone (whatever that view is, because you won't ever explain it).

Some truth seeker you are.

some pseudoskeptic you are....a "healthy" piece of steel, thats a good one.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Number1

We're all waiting anxiously for Kyle's reply now.

Don't you think Kyle could look up the already done calculations for how much potential energy that building represented? I do. But, I also think that we can't look at that aspect until we look at how the building did start to fall.
NIST indicated column 79 lost lateral support from the beam between column 44 and 79.
Knowing the formula to calculate the potential energy is nice but meaningless, imo, until you know all the other interconnected relationships.
I think the real issue is in testing that hypothesis. I wonder what their Sim would do if you just removed 79? Would the load redistribute to other columns? Was the design of the building so 'fragile' that losing one column flattens the building. IF that is the case then don't you think One of Kyle's nano thermite thingi could have done it too? Forget about Free Fall... the building came down and NIST said cuz of failure of 79 at the 13th floor...
It caused what appears to be a close to Free Fall event...
OK... Kyle's contention is that bad guys attacked the column 79 on the 13th floor...
Would that kill the building?

Edit: I don't mean that it IS Kyle's contention but using his name for my question..

 

[event8horizon]

kylebisme- this goes into the OP.
here is a peek at my theory. read the article very carefully. and remember that barnett said "that would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures."

barnett said "steel members", that is more than more. TLC tries to make it sound like swiss cheese steel is no big deal.....ohhh but it is a VERY big deal.


"One piece Dr. Astaneh-Asl saw was a charred horizontal I-beam from 7 World Trade Center, a 47-story skyscraper that collapsed from fire eight hours after the attacks. The beam, so named because its cross-section looks like a capital I, had clearly endured searing temperatures. Parts of the flat top of the I, once five-eighths of an inch thick, had vaporized.

Less clear was whether the beam had been charred after the collapse, as it lay in the pile of burning rubble, or whether it had been engulfed in the fire that led to the building's collapse, which would provide a more telling clue.

The answer lay in the beam's twisted shape. As weight pushed down, the center portion had buckled outward.

''This tells me it buckled while it was attached to the column,'' not as it fell, Dr. Astaneh-Asl said, adding, ''It had burned first, then buckled.''

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10...lues-and-remedies.html

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: Number1

We're all waiting anxiously for Kyle's reply now.

Don't you think Kyle could look up the already done calculations for how much potential energy that building represented? I do. But, I also think that we can't look at that aspect until we look at how the building did start to fall.
NIST indicated column 79 lost lateral support from the beam between column 44 and 79.
Knowing the formula to calculate the potential energy is nice but meaningless, imo, until you know all the other interconnected relationships.
I think the real issue is in testing that hypothesis. I wonder what their Sim would do if you just removed 79? Would the load redistribute to other columns? Was the design of the building so 'fragile' that losing one column flattens the building. IF that is the case then don't you think One of Kyle's nano thermite thingi could have done it too? Forget about Free Fall... the building came down and NIST said cuz of failure of 79 at the 13th floor...
It caused what appears to be a close to Free Fall event...
OK... Kyle's contention is that bad guys attacked the column 79 on the 13th floor...
Would that kill the building?

Edit: I don't mean that it IS Kyle's contention but using his name for my question..

if you havent already looked at the AVIRIS data, it is interesting that one of the wtc "hot spots" is pretty much where column 79 is. just a FYI. i think it was in the 700C range.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: event8horizon
here is ONE point. not even sisson has been able to "corrode" 15.9 mm of steel in 8 days like the steel of wtc 7.

He's not able to corrode a perfectly healthy piece of beam in that time. However, that assumes the beam was perfectly healthy in the first place and that it wasn't already seriously corroded before it was exposed to the events on and post 9/11. Nothing in the report indicates that a completely healthy beam was in evidence in the first place. In fact, he brings up issues of acid rain and exposure to sea water in the report, something you have ignored as a possibility. But you are quick to make such assumptions and ignore anything to the contrary because doing so supports your view alone (whatever that view is, because you won't ever explain it).

Some truth seeker you are.

some pseudoskeptic you are....a "healthy" piece of steel, thats a good one.

iow, you have no idea if the beam wasn't already heavily corroded before 9/11.

Thanks for telling me what I already knew.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
I really like this I didn't want to link it . But if ya watch all 12 videos you should be enlightened a little or a lot . Differant strokes for differant folks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...caEfQE&feature=related

Let me guess. You're a birther too?

Never met a conspiracy theory you didn't like, eh?

Everthing in that video is documented dance around that.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: event8horizon


if you havent already looked at the AVIRIS data, it is interesting that one of the wtc "hot spots" is pretty much where column 79 is. just a FYI. i think it was in the 700C range.

I've looked at more stuff than sanity allows on WTC 7... hehehehheheh

I'm postulating an alternative hypothesis... Bad delinquents put nano thermite on column 79 on the 13th floor... can that kill the building?


edit: bright delinquents and really really bad one.. but yes, I read that and saw that too.
That would be evidence in support of my hypothesis IF killing 79 kills WTC 7.

 

[Number1]

event8horizon you keep posting the same allegations over and over again. Why? We're not going to change our mind just because you said it one more time.

I am really curious to see what Kyle's reply is going to be. Is he finally going to explain how the building fell and why the NIST's model is wrong.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: Number1

We're all waiting anxiously for Kyle's reply now.

Don't you think Kyle could look up the already done calculations for how much potential energy that building represented? I do. But, I also think that we can't look at that aspect until we look at how the building did start to fall.
NIST indicated column 79 lost lateral support from the beam between column 44 and 79.
Knowing the formula to calculate the potential energy is nice but meaningless, imo, until you know all the other interconnected relationships.
I think the real issue is in testing that hypothesis. I wonder what their Sim would do if you just removed 79? Would the load redistribute to other columns? Was the design of the building so 'fragile' that losing one column flattens the building. IF that is the case then don't you think One of Kyle's nano thermite thingi could have done it too? Forget about Free Fall... the building came down and NIST said cuz of failure of 79 at the 13th floor...
It caused what appears to be a close to Free Fall event...
OK... Kyle's contention is that bad guys attacked the column 79 on the 13th floor...
Would that kill the building?

Edit: I don't mean that it IS Kyle's contention but using his name for my question..

If you consider thermite we are back to termites and elephants again. Why didn't the NIST report consider termites and elephants? It's because they could be easily ruled out.

The planting of thermite would mean that super ninjas somehow snuck in past any security and planted thousands of pounds of thermite around the beams without anyone noticing. That includes the day and night workers in WTC7 as well as the maintenance staff and janitorial staff. Not single person noticed anything out of place while ninjas were tearing out drywall (the beams were not exposed), placing charges, wiring charges, re-drywalling (taping, mudding, and texturing), and painting to cover up any traces of their tampering. Then they obviously got rid of the paint smell too, somehow, before anyone came across the area and noticed.

That kind of stuff may exist in Hollywood movies. It doesn't irl though. It's simply not possible that thermite/super-thermite/thermate/nano-thermite was planted. It's as unlikely as elephants and termites.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Number1
event8horizon you keep posting the same allegations over and over again. Why? We're not going to change our mind just because you said it one more time.

I am really curious to see what Kyle's reply is going to be. Is he finally going to explain how the building fell and why the NIST's model is wrong.

Maybe NIST got it right... but with the wrong assumption to start with??? IF NIST [and I think they have some of the finest minds working on that project] has a model that mirrors the fall and to do that 79 died at 13th floor and NO other series of events can cause that in the modeling efforts... we focus on 79!

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

If you consider thermite we are back to termites and elephants again. Why didn't the NIST report consider termites and elephants? It's because they could be easily ruled out.

The planting of thermite would mean that super ninjas somehow snuck in past any security and planted thousands of pounds of thermite around the beams without anyone noticing. That includes the day and night workers in WTC7 as well as the maintenance staff and janitorial staff. Not single person noticed anything out of place while ninjas were tearing out drywall (the beams were not exposed), placing charges, wiring charges, re-drywalling (taping, mudding, and texturing), and painting to cover up any traces of their tampering. Then they obviously got rid of the paint smell too, somehow, before anyone came across the area and noticed.

That kind of stuff may exist in Hollywood movies. It doesn't irl though. It's simply not possible that thermite/super-thermite/thermate/nano-thermite was planted. It's as unlikely as elephants and termites.

If you'd read what I said you'd see I said column 79... not tons of thermite but pounds...

 

[LunarRay]

TastesLikeChicken,


Ya see, I'm still wondering about that 11 - 13 floor stuff... SEC investigating WorldCom and Enron... among 100s of others... floor 10 no fire... no fire seen on 11 - 13 until much later. I hear quacking lots of quacking and I'm looking for a duck ... can't find one yet... but I still hear quacking.
As I said, I'm not into the Truth.com theory I'm still with the Government's Conspiracy Theory... but quack quack... the unmistakable sound of ducks...

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

If you consider thermite we are back to termites and elephants again. Why didn't the NIST report consider termites and elephants? It's because they could be easily ruled out.

The planting of thermite would mean that super ninjas somehow snuck in past any security and planted thousands of pounds of thermite around the beams without anyone noticing. That includes the day and night workers in WTC7 as well as the maintenance staff and janitorial staff. Not single person noticed anything out of place while ninjas were tearing out drywall (the beams were not exposed), placing charges, wiring charges, re-drywalling (taping, mudding, and texturing), and painting to cover up any traces of their tampering. Then they obviously got rid of the paint smell too, somehow, before anyone came across the area and noticed.

That kind of stuff may exist in Hollywood movies. It doesn't irl though. It's simply not possible that thermite/super-thermite/thermate/nano-thermite was planted. It's as unlikely as elephants and termites.

If you'd read what I said you'd see I said column 79... not tons of thermite but pounds...

You said "thermite." Specifically "nano thermite." Allow me to refresh your memory:

"IF that is the case then don't you think One of Kyle's nano thermite thingi could have done it too?"

Edit: "pounds" would not have had any effect unless you're talking about thousands of pounds, which would qualify as "tons."

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
You said "thermite." Specifically "nano thermite." Allow me to refresh your memory:

"IF that is the case then don't you think One of Kyle's nano thermite thingi could have done it too?"

" ... I think the real issue is in testing that hypothesis. I wonder what their Sim would do if you just removed 79? Would the load redistribute to other columns? Was the design of the building so 'fragile' that losing one column flattens the building. IF that is the case then don't you think One of Kyle's nano thermite thingi could have done it too? Forget about Free Fall... the building came down and NIST said cuz of failure of 79 at the 13th floor...
It caused what appears to be a close to Free Fall event...
OK... Kyle's contention is that bad guys attacked the column 79 on the 13th floor...
Would that kill the building?... "

Read that above again ok..

First, it is a question... notice the ' ? '. Second, what preceded the question was the predicate for the question.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: Number1

Originally posted by: kylebisme
No, you've just offered hand waving to obfuscate your inability to support your claim, and I won't waste my time reading further into any of your posts which doesn't start off with acknowledging this fact.

LOL you sound like the fatso in South Park "I am not playing anymore, I am going home."

You sound like a guy who pulled a claim out of his ass and insists on playing games to pretend otherwise, and I have no interest in anything of the sort.

You also have no interest...

You wasted your time typing past there. Again, either start out your reply by admitting your statistical claim was bullshit, or I won't read further into your post than it takes to see that you didn't.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
You said "thermite." Specifically "nano thermite." Allow me to refresh your memory:

"IF that is the case then don't you think One of Kyle's nano thermite thingi could have done it too?"

" ... I think the real issue is in testing that hypothesis. I wonder what their Sim would do if you just removed 79? Would the load redistribute to other columns? Was the design of the building so 'fragile' that losing one column flattens the building. IF that is the case then don't you think One of Kyle's nano thermite thingi could have done it too? Forget about Free Fall... the building came down and NIST said cuz of failure of 79 at the 13th floor...
It caused what appears to be a close to Free Fall event...
OK... Kyle's contention is that bad guys attacked the column 79 on the 13th floor...
Would that kill the building?... "

Read that above again ok..

First, it is a question... notice the ' ? '. Second, what preceded the question was the predicate for the question.

I've read it multiple times already and it's still faulty. There's not any comparison that's apples to apples unless I assume that you are already taking into consideration the gash in the south side along with the weakening from the fire.

Then you also have to consider the logistics of placing tons of thermite on the beams. Want to know a dirty little secret that the truthers fail to mention? Nano-thermite still doesn't exist. Like nearly everything "nano" it's still in the research phase. Yet we are supposed to believe we had this capability already 8 years ago, and far longer than that if you consider the planning that must have been required to plan 9/11.

C'mon, man. I'm all about considering possibilities. Those possibilities have to conform to logic and sense though.

 

[Number1]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: Number1

Originally posted by: kylebisme
No, you've just offered hand waving to obfuscate your inability to support your claim, and I won't waste my time reading further into any of your posts which doesn't start off with acknowledging this fact.

LOL you sound like the fatso in South Park "I am not playing anymore, I am going home."

You sound like a guy who pulled a claim out of his ass and insists on playing games to pretend otherwise, and I have no interest in anything of the sort.

You also have no interest...

You wasted your time typing past there. Again, either start out your reply by admitting your statistical claim was bullshit, or I won't read further into your post than it takes to see that you didn't.

Why don't you just STFU now, read DRPizza's post and formulate some kind of answer.

Your OP is seriously flawed, DrPizza proved it.

Defend your OP or go away with your tail between your legs.

 

[JohnnyGage]

Well, you know TLC--Elvis had a lot of money and he was able to get a hold of nano thermite that only the military had at the time and only small quantities. He had a bus load of drug dealers disguised as construction workers and then started trucking in thousands of tons into the elevator shafts and attached the now mass quantities of nano thermite to all of the steel support beams. It took 5 years to complete not to mention the headache of getting employee badges, computer passwords and door combinations for towers 1 and 2. Once complete, Sonny West the most skilled member of the Memphis Mafia was able to rig, not one but four 757's with remote control capabilities. The timing was just right that the initial flights of UA 175, AA11, and AA75 were landing at a secret air base for other reasons. He was able to maneuver the planes into the Towers one and two and the pentagon without a hitch. Flight 93 was a different matter, his counterpart Joe Esposito forgot to charge the batteries for the flight. He hasn't been seen since. After the completion of the demolished towers, all the construction workers(now disguised as fire and police) removed all evidence of the aforementioned thermite and millions of blasting caps. They were able to make their getaway in a 1965 Ford Fairlane parked blocks away at the Hardrock Cafe. At the end of the day Red said "You're on a roll tonight E.


See it just that simple......

BTW keep it up between you and Beaujangles will have them all confused.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I've read it multiple times already and it's still faulty. There's not any comparison that's apples to apples unless I assume that you are already taking into considertation the gash in the south side along with the weakening from the fire.

Then you also have to consider the logistics of placing tons of thermite on the beams. Want to know a dirty little secret that the truthers fail to mention? Nano-thermite still doesn't exist. Like nearly everything "nano" it's still in the research phase. Yet we are supposed to believe we had this capability already 8 years ago, and far longer than that if you consider the planning that must have been required to plan 9/11.

C'mon, man. I'm all about considering possibilities. Those possibilities have to conform to logic and sense though.

NIST said that the gash had not at all to do with the failure of 79. They said fire cause it to weaken etc...
I'm using NIST to suggest any focus ought to start with column 79.
I asked what to me is a sensible question and that is: NIST says failure of 79 caused the building to collapse. Fires caused 79 to undergo the events that led to 79's failure. I'm simply asking IF that is true could fire and thermite or thermite and no fire have caused the events? IF we absolutely need fire then I'm not so sure Thermite on only 79 would do it... but we don't know. They didn't test that hypothesis.

ONE COLUMN don't need tons of Thermite... I'm talking about 1 column... column 79...

 

[LunarRay]

Kyle,
Just type out Bazant's thingi or

E = 1/2 M V squared for falling thingi

or some other mathamechanics.

Make em all happy... if you do it they will not be able to challenge your abilty to type on the page a formula anymore?

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: Number1

Originally posted by: kylebisme
No, you've just offered hand waving to obfuscate your inability to support your claim, and I won't waste my time reading further into any of your posts which doesn't start off with acknowledging this fact.

LOL you sound like the fatso in South Park "I am not playing anymore, I am going home."

You sound like a guy who pulled a claim out of his ass and insists on playing games to pretend otherwise, and I have no interest in anything of the sort.

You also have no interest...

You wasted your time typing past there. Again, either start out your reply by admitting your statistical claim was bullshit, or I won't read further into your post than it takes to see that you didn't.

There isn't a number. There will never be an accurate number. It's wrong to stick any number on it, but it doesn't make it wrong to say that all evidence points to an extremely high degree of concurrence among engineers.

I've outlined a solid explanation for why we can easily conclude there is a mandate of engineers who support the "government" story in previous posts, I've asked you questions in previous posts. You refuse to answer any of them and instead are playing childish games. Man up and try taking a crack at the actual questions I've asked at any point say... in this entire thread? That's right. You have no answers for me, Dr Pizza, TastesLikeChicken, the NIST report, or anything that contradicts your wonderful little world where you're some super-genius that has figured out how the WTC collapsed when thousands of people failed.

Read my last post again.

Shit, read my last post AND read Dr Pizza's post.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: Number1

We're all waiting anxiously for Kyle's reply now.

Don't you think Kyle could look up the already done calculations for how much potential energy that building represented? I do. But, I also think that we can't look at that aspect until we look at how the building did start to fall.
NIST indicated column 79 lost lateral support from the beam between column 44 and 79.
Knowing the formula to calculate the potential energy is nice but meaningless, imo, until you know all the other interconnected relationships.
I think the real issue is in testing that hypothesis. I wonder what their Sim would do if you just removed 79? Would the load redistribute to other columns? Was the design of the building so 'fragile' that losing one column flattens the building. IF that is the case then don't you think One of Kyle's nano thermite thingi could have done it too? Forget about Free Fall... the building came down and NIST said cuz of failure of 79 at the 13th floor...
It caused what appears to be a close to Free Fall event...
OK... Kyle's contention is that bad guys attacked the column 79 on the 13th floor...
Would that kill the building?

Edit: I don't mean that it IS Kyle's contention but using his name for my question..

If you consider thermite we are back to termites and elephants again. Why didn't the NIST report consider termites and elephants? It's because they could be easily ruled out.

The planting of thermite would mean that super ninjas somehow snuck in past any security and planted thousands of pounds of thermite around the beams without anyone noticing. That includes the day and night workers in WTC7 as well as the maintenance staff and janitorial staff. Not single person noticed anything out of place while ninjas were tearing out drywall (the beams were not exposed), placing charges, wiring charges, re-drywalling (taping, mudding, and texturing), and painting to cover up any traces of their tampering. Then they obviously got rid of the paint smell too, somehow, before anyone came across the area and noticed.

That kind of stuff may exist in Hollywood movies. It doesn't irl though. It's simply not possible that thermite/super-thermite/thermate/nano-thermite was planted. It's as unlikely as elephants and termites.

Tons LOL . Why is it so unlikely. If this goes to the top . its more than likely. Many possiabilities exist if its USA government involved. The Idea of terrorist doing this . Than I agree with you . Whos to say the real target here was building 7 . Were the criminals were set lose because fraud evidance was destroyed 100,s of billions. Calfornia could sure use the Money enron stole from them can't they.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: JohnnyGage
Well, you know TLC--Elvis had a lot of money and he was able to get a hold of nano thermite that only the military had at the time and only small quantities. He had a bus load of drug dealers disguised as construction workers and then started trucking in thousands of tons into the elevator shafts and attached the now mass quantities of nano thermite to all of the steel support beams. It took 5 years to complete not to mention the headache of getting employee badges, computer passwords and door combinations for towers 1 and 2. Once complete, Sonny West the most skilled member of the Memphis Mafia was able to rig, not one but four 757's with remote control capabilities. The timing was just right that the initial flights of UA 175, AA11, and AA75 were landing at a secret air base for other reasons. He was able to maneuver the planes into the Towers one and two and the pentagon without a hitch. Flight 93 was a different matter, his counterpart Joe Esposito forgot to charge the batteries for the flight. He hasn't been seen since. After the completion of the demolished towers, all the construction workers(now disguised as fire and police) removed all evidence of the aforementioned thermite and millions of blasting caps. They were able to make their getaway in a 1965 Ford Fairlane parked blocks away at the Hardrock Cafe. At the end of the day Red said "You're on a roll tonight E.


See it just that simple......

BTW keep it up between you and Beaujangles will have them all confused.

Not bad, not bad at all... cept the evidence of Thermite.. they must have missed some. They probably didn't go all around and vacuum the apartments and offices that had dust 6" deep..
See... Crime does not pay.. sooner or later someone will find the evidence of Elvis' immortal bad deed.

Edit: bet you didn't think I'd read that post, did you?