What brought down WTC7

[kylebisme]

A structure to which both would apply... hmmmm assuming time is not of the essence, I'd say any building of any size burning long enough...

I mean assuming the same timeframe and same conditions in both cases. Again, can both statements be true for one structure?

Poor Kyle, his imaginary demolition planners would have taken into account the size of the fires, the number of fires and their locations in order to minimize the amount of explosive needed.

No, I don't at all, but I can imagine how it might seem that way to someone who lacks the attention span and/or intellect to follow the conversation.

You do not have the expertise to prove them wrong.

Rather, I do and I did, but I don't have the ability get thick headed dolts like yourself to come to terms with that.

 

[LunarRay]

I mean assuming the same timeframe and same conditions in both cases. Again, can both statements be true for one structure?

I can't think of a structure that could collapse from fire/damage alone and also collapse if it had the same fire/damage but require explosives...

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

How one concludes as they do is based on their approach. Irrational is when someone has no rational basis for what they conclude... A whole host of Engineers in this field agree with TLC... so, based on that his approach seems quite rational... right or wrong as the case may be.

I fully admit I could possibly be wrong about what brought down the towers (And I'll be waiting for kyle to parse that one single statement and thereby take it out of context). However, as you mentioned, it's all about probabilities and being rational. The chance that I'm wrong is likely far less than 0.01%. If kyle wants to be a member of those 0.01 percenters then he's welcome to believe that way. After all, despite all the evidence, there are still people who insist the Earth is flat. Some people simply refuse to listen to reason or be rational about probabilities. kyle is obviously one of them.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Rather, I do and I did, but I don't have the ability get thick headed dolts like yourself to come to terms with that.

Rather, you didn't and don't.

It'd be a member callout to do so but I'd love to have a thread with a poll asking ATP&N who the real thick-headed dolt has been in this thread. There's no doubt you'd be the overwhelming winner, by a longshot.

 

[LunarRay]

I fully admit I could possibly be wrong about what brought down the towers (And I'll be waiting for kyle to parse that one single statement and thereby take it out of context). However, as you mentioned, it's all about probabilities and being rational. The chance that I'm wrong is likely far less than 0.01%. If kyle wants to be a member of those 0.01 percenters then he's welcome to believe that way. After all, despite all the evidence, there are still people who insist the Earth is flat. Some people simply refuse to listen to reason or be rational about probabilities. kyle is obviously one of them.

I think we are nearing the end of evidence discovery. IF what we have on the table right now is not enough to convince, I doubt any convincing will occur to those who are already aware of the lot of it. I think the Truther movement is aimed at those who are becoming aware and those getting into their teens and want to hate something...

I see lots of bits of stuff and have heard lots of eyeballs speak to evidence and see those dam videos and know what it takes to build a case... We ain't there! Ya just don't indict on what we have as evidence.... you wait for more evidence to surface, if that is possible you may indict then... maybe not.

I started in this thread thinking that WTC7 did not fall from fires/damage alone... but the rest of it I accepted as the Official Conspiracy Theory explained. I've spent hours upon hours reading and watching and calculating and etc.

Today, I'm still thinking someone started some fires on 11 - 13 of WTC7 and now with Thermate et. al. in the picture... well, as far as WTC7 goes... I think someone may have used it there IF there is no other explanation for it being there, if it was... The rest of 9/11 is still the same... Terror attack... plain and simple... The SEC and its Enron and WorldCom and other goings on.... That is a big deal and worth the risk all by itself... EDIT: I can easily see affected parties wanting that building down totally and to blame it on a terror attack all by itself... but, that is me not trusting a foot the players in that arena...

 

[Number1]

An overwhelming majority of experts agree with the conclusions of the NIST report. ONLY the lunatic fringe has tried to discredit the report.

Believe me Kyle, the smart people agreed with the NIST report. They are on my side.

Just keep talking about unknown forces Kyle, about stupid comparisons between small and large amount of explosive required to bring down building versus fire, of the look on somebody's face as evidence of a conspiracy, of your consistently demonstrable laws of physics, of your inability to expend on your "maths" and of your religious belief that 911 was an inside job.

We tried in good faith to open your eyes but you don't want to look or you don't have the ability to understand what is going on around you.

I pity you in your dark sinister world. And look what kind of people are on your side of the debate: people like Nemesis1!!!

LOL you're a joke Kyle.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

I started in this thread thinking that WTC7 did not fall from fires/damage alone... but the rest of it I accepted as the Official Conspiracy Theory explained. I've spent hours upon hours reading and watching and calculating and etc.

Today, I'm still thinking someone started some fires on 11 - 13 of WTC7 and now with Thermate et. al. in the picture... well, as far as WTC7 goes... I think someone may have used it there IF there is no other explanation for it being there, if it was... The rest of 9/11 is still the same... Terror attack... plain and simple... The SEC and its Enron and WorldCom and other goings on.... That is a big deal and worth the risk all by itself...

Here's the problem with that scenario. It would require that 9/11 be planned so the planes would hit the Twin Towers in exactly the right place, somehow calculating they would collapse and debris would fall in just the right place on WTC7 and start fires, thereby necessitating that thermite only be placed on certain floors to finish the job. They'd also had to make sure the water main was damaged so the fires on the other floors couldn't be quenched by those pesky firemen.

We're dealing with likelihoods again. Is it possible? Sure, even though that possibility is miniscule. I mean, it's possible we both might suddenly be transported to the other side of the universe too. Quantum physics allows for that to happen. However, is it probable? Highly unlikely.

 

[LunarRay]

Here's the problem with that scenario. It would require that 9/11 be planned so the planes would hit the Twin Towers in exactly the right place, somehow calculating they would collapse and debris would fall in just the right place on WTC7 and start fires, thereby necessitating that thermite only be placed on certain floors to finish the job. They'd also had to make sure the water main was damaged so the fires on the other floors couldn't be quenched by those pesky firemen.

We're dealing with likelihoods again. Is it possible? Sure, even though that possibility is miniscule. I mean, it's possible we both might suddenly be transported to the other side of the universe too. Quantum physics allows for that to happen. However, is it probable? Highly unlikely.

What I mean is; forget 9/11 terror attacks even occurred. Just that WTC7 was the target of folks who wanted to get rid of or DELAY the SEC actions until they could get their messes sorted out.. that WAS the issue with Enron.. time.. given a bit more they could have gotten out of the mess... WorldCom.. a bit different..
My point is that those affected could have planned to do something to that Building and call it a Terror Attack.. That the 9/11 attack did happen was simply a coincidence for them.
When NIST OR FEMA said the oil fires (if any) and damage did not matter... to the collapse... then Thermate... it lit my fuse again... hehehehehhehe

EDIT: Given about six months I could have unwound the 'off balance sheet losses' and the lot of it... they had great potential to rip off lots of folks for quite some time... they were good...

 

[Ozoned]

You understood that... I'm impressed!

Can you elaborate.. I'm interested in that steel... what aside from the thermate stuff do you think could have done it in that short time that also would have been in contact with those steel bits... and would it have left any tell tale evidence the investigators ought to have found?

Corrosion could have occurred In the aftermath, even days later, and completely unrelated to the collapse.

Lye, acids (drain cleaners) and chlorine products. Chlorine tabs coming in contact with an oil can burn very hot. A weak soution of muratic acid (a common tile and grout cleaner) can oxidize steel very fast.
Other considerations....
Swiss cheese effect~ The amount of high voltage electricity flowing through the edison substation diverted to an unintended ground for even just a fraction of a second could blow huge holes in steel members,,,,and columns.

NIST,,,, I think,,, said unknown forces because it was easier than accounting for the variables.

There is no detailed documentation of the damage that occurred to WTC7 from the collapse of towers. Nist even says no damage that would cause collapse, but how could they really know? It's just a best guess

Also, very few of the pictures on the internet, though many are sourced, few are source verified. Can't trust everything you see.

If the truth ISN'T out there, you aren't going to find it. If it is, you aren't going to see it. To much garbage in the way...

 

[First]

An overwhelming majority of experts agree with the conclusions of the NIST report. ONLY the lunatic fringe has tried to discredit the report.

Believe me Kyle, the smart people agreed with the NIST report. They are on my side.

Just keep talking about unknown forces Kyle, about stupid comparisons between small and large amount of explosive required to bring down building versus fire, of the look on somebody's face as evidence of a conspiracy, of your consistently demonstrable laws of physics, of your inability to expend on your "maths" and of your religious belief that 911 was an inside job.

We tried in good faith to open your eyes but you don't want to look or you don't have the ability to understand what is going on around you.

I pity you in your dark sinister world. And look what kind of people are on your side of the debate: people like Nemesis1!!!

LOL you're a joke Kyle.

The fact that this turd doesn't even bother responding to posts that dismantle his notions says it all. Most truthers just seem to be poorly educated, disabled (literally true in the OP's case), or are in some way stubborn enough to believe their high school physics substitution is proof of anything another than basic algebra, which btw isn't anywhere near a proof in mathematical terms, as it would need to be considering zero quantitative analysis was performed by said OP.

At this point, it's best to let the troll feed off himself. I'm sure sometime in the future we can all opine about the time that silly truther thought he had won a debate.

 

[LunarRay]

Lye, acids (drain cleaners) and chlorine products. Chlorine tabs coming in contact with an oil can burn very hot. A weak soution of muratic acid (a common tile and grout cleaner) can oxidize steel very fast.
Other considerations....
Swiss cheese effect~ The amount of high voltage electricity flowing through the edison substation diverted to an unintended ground for even just a fraction of a second could blow huge holes in steel members,,,,and columns.

OK, thanks...
I forgot about ConEd... but not about the trains and they are electric.. I think the IRT line went to the WTC... lots of amps and fed from elsewhere... Not sure of the Jersey line coming in.
Typical cleaning supplies kept in the building would include what you mentioned and drain cleaners.. I use muriatic acid.. hehehehe plastic pipes.. Actually, there are other chemicals on site as well... lots of it.
There is enough 'other' explanation for the bits found to pass that by as inconclusive at best.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

What I mean is; forget 9/11 terror attacks even occurred. Just that WTC7 was the target of folks who wanted to get rid of or DELAY the SEC actions until they could get their messes sorted out.. that WAS the issue with Enron.. time.. given a bit more they could have gotten out of the mess... WorldCom.. a bit different..
My point is that those affected could have planned to do something to that Building and call it a Terror Attack.. That the 9/11 attack did happen was simply a coincidence for them.
When NIST OR FEMA said the oil fires (if any) and damage did not matter... to the collapse... then Thermate... it lit my fuse again... hehehehehhehe

EDIT: Given about six months I could have unwound the 'off balance sheet losses' and the lot of it... they had great potential to rip off lots of folks for quite some time... they were good...

The question is never "Could they?," it is "Did they?". Simply citing motivation is not enough in a court of law nor is it here. Is it reason for initial suspicion? Sure. However, solid proof must follow or it's nothing but hollow suspicion.

 

[LunarRay]

The question is never "Could they?," it is "Did they?". Simply citing motivation is not enough in a court of law nor is it here. Is it reason for initial suspicion? Sure. However, solid proof must follow or it's nothing but hollow suspicion.

Hehehehehe Yup! I know that... but, as I said it is my bias... I didn't trust the players and wouldn't put anything past them...
I want to pin a tail on them hehehehehehe, I know this too! Give me an ounce and I'll turn it into a pound in this case....

When I get off my 'I hate Skilling/Fay/Fastow et. al.' horsey sometimes my feet hit the ground... sometimes they don't... hehehehehehe I even felt badly for them at one time..
Of course I don't mention who else might have been involved cuz that would be speculation.. IF WTC7 was demo'd I know just where to look first...

 

[event8horizon]

Corrosion could have occurred In the aftermath, even days later, and completely unrelated to the collapse.

Lye, acids (drain cleaners) and chlorine products. Chlorine tabs coming in contact with an oil can burn very hot. A weak soution of muratic acid (a common tile and grout cleaner) can oxidize steel very fast.
Other considerations....
Swiss cheese effect~ The amount of high voltage electricity flowing through the edison substation diverted to an unintended ground for even just a fraction of a second could blow huge holes in steel members,,,,and columns.

NIST,,,, I think,,, said unknown forces because it was easier than accounting for the variables.

There is no detailed documentation of the damage that occurred to WTC7 from the collapse of towers. Nist even says no damage that would cause collapse, but how could they really know? It's just a best guess

Also, very few of the pictures on the internet, though many are sourced, few are source verified. Can't trust everything you see.

If the truth ISN'T out there, you aren't going to find it. If it is, you aren't going to see it. To much garbage in the way...

maybe you need to actually read about the steel from the towers and wtc 7.

"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.

"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. "


notice that they dont know when it started or the cause of the sulfur. how many of those items you listed contains sulfur? and do you really know how much sulfur one needs to form a eutectic at 1100C? i also noticed that the muratic acid boils about 100C. guess what temp was the "experts" think it occured at? well above 100C!!

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/metallurgy/WTC_apndxC.htm

 

[kylebisme]

I can't think of a structure that could collapse from fire/damage alone and also collapse if it had the same fire/damage but require explosives...

Well that is what TLC is asking you to do when he claims:

... the amount of thermite/thermite required to bring down the buildings would have been massive.

As the fire/damage was there, which he suggests was enough to bring the buildings down on their own.

I think the Truther movement is aimed at those who are becoming aware and those getting into their teens and want to hate something...

There are hateful people on both sides of the argument, to characterise it as a truther thing is absurd.

An overwhelming majority of experts agree with the conclusions of the NIST report.

Only in your imagination, which is why you can't prove anything of the sort.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Well that is what TLC is asking you to do when he claims:


As the fire/damage was there, which he suggests was enough to bring the buildings down on their own.


There are hateful people on both sides of the argument, to characterise it as a truther thing is absurd.


Only in your imagination, which is why you can't prove anything of the sort.

Denial. It rhymes with kyle.

 

[Number1]

I wonder why we keep responding to this asshole. Nothing we could ever say will ever change his mind.

He think he has proven the NIST wrong with his simple third grader formulas and that anybody who disagrees with him bases his opinion on faith.

I think Kyle will die a twuther.

 

[DrPizza]

I quit arguing a while ago. No point now. Everything's been refuted enough. There's no way we would ever get Kyle to admit he's wrong; he's got too much invested in it. However, if there were any people just considering the possibility, and they read through this thread, I think they would walk away with the impression that Kyle et al are bat shit insane. Good enough. Having seen his name mentioned in a few other threads, it's pretty clear that Kyle has probably permanently removed any chance that people will take him seriously. Why waste any more time on his ridiculous argument that he lacks the ability to back up (both with facts, and also with math/physics knowledge)?

 

[Ozoned]

maybe you need to actually read about the steel from the towers and wtc 7.

"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.

"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. "


notice that they dont know when it started or the cause of the sulfur. how many of those items you listed contains sulfur? and do you really know how much sulfur one needs to form a eutectic at 1100C? i also noticed that the muratic acid boils about 100C. guess what temp was the "experts" think it occured at? well above 100C!!

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/metallurgy/WTC_apndxC.htm

Most thermoplastic cements ( common patching compounds) have sulpher in them. IIRC, some are up to 80% sulpher. They melt at relatively low temperatures. I have used them as adhesive to hold ceramic insulating bricks and ceramic blankets in place for fire-proofing. They generally come in 5 gallon buckets.

Your link also speculates how some of this could have happened days after the collapse.

 

[LunarRay]

Well that is what TLC is asking you to do when he claims
As the fire/damage was there, which he suggests was enough to bring the buildings down on their own.
There are hateful people on both sides of the argument, to characterise it as a truther thing is absurd.

For reference I've quoted the bits of post #1915 that I'm replying to.

You said, ~ ...Well, what you are asking was, their own TLC to characterise the waste of buildings down there as absurd. It is a truther thing then which he suggests this as hateful. There is argument enough to bring fire/damage on both sides when he claims that people do.
Extra Letters [ o o ]

I'm not at all sure I agree but so long as you do I'm fine with that.

 

[LunarRay]

I quit arguing a while ago. No point now. Everything's been refuted enough. There's no way we would ever get Kyle to admit he's wrong; he's got too much invested in it. However, if there were any people just considering the possibility, and they read through this thread, I think they would walk away with the impression that Kyle et al are bat shit insane. Good enough. Having seen his name mentioned in a few other threads, it's pretty clear that Kyle has probably permanently removed any chance that people will take him seriously. Why waste any more time on his ridiculous argument that he lacks the ability to back up (both with facts, and also with math/physics knowledge)?

I can't wait for the "yet to be determined force" which terminated WTC7 to be ... determined. You'll be soooooooo ... what ever it is that you all physical science folks become when his truth becomes your truth.. heheheheheh Thyne eyes have seen the coming of the coming of the truth, he is marching out the ramparts where the science feared to go ... (...) ... his truth is marching on.. hehehhehehhehe

 

[LunarRay]

Most thermoplastic cements ( common patching compounds) have sulpher in them. IIRC, some are up to 80% sulpher. They melt at relatively low temperatures. I have used them as adhesive to hold ceramic insulating bricks and ceramic blankets in place for fire-proofing. They generally come in 5 gallon buckets.

Your link also speculates how some of this could have happened days after the collapse.

I don't know if it is 80% but I think the bag outside has sulfur as the main ingredient.
They must have used that stuff to patch up the holes after applying the Thermate to the steel so the hole wouldn't be noticed.... :+)

 

[kylebisme]

I quit arguing a while ago. No point now. Everything's been refuted enough.

You engaged in a bit of inane disputation, along with all the other half-whits here. That is all any of you falsers have, as WTC7's period of free fall acceleration being the result of yet to be identified forces is an irrefutable fact.

There's no way we would ever get Kyle to admit he's wrong; he's got too much invested in it.

Says the guy who can't even own up to the fact that the examples he presented both contain forces beyond that imparted by gravity acting on the systems. That is rich with irony.

However, if there were any people just considering the possibility, and they read through this thread, I think they would walk away with the impression that Kyle et al are bat shit insane.

Assuming they are as delusional as you, no doubt they would.

Good enough. Having seen his name mentioned in a few other threads, it's pretty clear that Kyle has probably permanently removed any chance that people will take him seriously.

Citing other peoples inability to come to terms with reality to defend your own is just pitiful.

Why waste any more time on his ridiculous argument that he lacks the ability to back up (both with facts, and also with math/physics knowledge)?

Says the guy who, when I asked to present a mathematical argument to refute the one I made, responded by presenting me with a problem out of his teacher manual instead. Again, rich with irony.

I can't wait for the "yet to be determined force" which terminated WTC7 to be ... determined.

That isn't going to happen until we can convince the masses to support a proper investigation into the matter.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

You engaged in a bit of inane disputation, along with all the other half-whits here. That is all any of you falsers have, as WTC7's period of free fall acceleration being the result of yet to be identified forces is an irrefutable fact.

It's only an "irrefutable fact" in your own mind. Plenty of others in here who are actually knowledgeable understand why it's possible. We understand that it not only possible, but inevitable in this case. The fact they you can't understand doesn't imply unknown forces were involved. It merely means you're too ignorant and/or wrapped up in your own stupidity to even want to understand in the first place.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally Posted by LunarRay
I can't wait for the "yet to be determined force" which terminated WTC7 to be ... determined.

By Kyle: That isn't going to happen until we can convince the masses to support a proper investigation into the matter.

What evidence beyond what already has been 'outed' might there be that could get folks to do that? In this country, apathy sets in faster than concrete dries. You get one bite at the apple of public opinion... after that folks don't want to hear they were wrong. The theme some Truthers put out is that Government did it... Bush's Iraq/Afghanistan issue is still going full bore and many think he made up the Iraqi invasion criteria.
Nothing will come of anything anymore. You could find a video of folks with 'bad guy' on their uniform carrying bags marked 'Thermate' into the buildings and you'd get laughed off the news... Folks just don't care in large enough numbers to do a thing. Maybe in 10 years from now when Congress needs to do something they will hold hearings into it all.. Or when some big group of Engineers not already committed publish peer reviewed articles in the face of losing their credibility, you might.

You have to choose when to fish and when to cut bait...