Fire Consumes Skyscraper, It does not collapse

[RecycleMichael]

Thanks for the correction. The Walton's had that annoying John Boy character.

I never really watched much of these shows. I was more into cartoons and watching Jeopardy.

One of my most anticipated lines to say in my life is, "cartoons for 2,000, Alex."

[Hometown]

We may never know everything that happened that day.  We will certainly know more than we know now, in another 15 years.  Over time I've run across arguments questioning official reports that I found very compelling.  From the Get-Go I've believed that we shot down Flight "what was it" 93 to protect Washington.

I think it's a little naive to believe that we know everything about it.  Reminds me of the bright but naive woman from Oakland that told me -- with a straight face -- there is no mob corruption on the West Coast.

I would like to get the full story on the Kennedy assassination before I die.  That's where my generation's cynicism began.  I mean, we acknowledge there is still information being withheld and President Ford raised questions about the CIA's role before he died.

I mean, do you guys turn off the news at night satisfied that you have heard the whole truth about everything that happened that day?  If you do, I'm envious of your simplicity and your ability to trust.

[rwarn17588]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

We may never know everything that happened that day.  We will certainly know more than we know now, in another 15 years.  Over time I've run across arguments questioning official reports that I found very compelling.  From the Get-Go I've believed that we shot down Flight "what was it" 93 to protect Washington.

That sound you just heard is Hometown's credibility flying out the window.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

Thanks for the correction. The Walton's had that annoying John Boy character.

I never really watched much of these shows. I was more into cartoons and watching Jeopardy.

One of my most anticipated lines to say in my life is, "cartoons for 2,000, Alex."

And John Boy is now the voice of Mercedes Benz.  He's come a long way from a Model A truck.

[altruismsuffers]

OK Cannon I don't need to go into detail.  NIST originally claimed that the building did NOT FALL AT FREE FALL SPEED because that would require a lack of resistance or NO RESISTANCE.  Then they come back and change their story and say YES THE BUILDING DID FALL AT FREE FALL SPEED.  How do you explain this silly anomaly.  And remember, this is NIST, the bees knees, the cream of the crop.

-Stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): gravitational acceleration (free fall)

During the first round of questions in the Aug 26, 2008 NIST Technical Briefing (at 1:01:45 into the presentation) the following question was asked by David Chandler:

"Any number of competent measurements using a variety of methods indicate the northwest corner of WTC 7 fell with an acceleration within a few percent of the acceleration of gravity. Yet your report contradicts this, claiming 40% slower than freefall based on a single data point. How can such a public, visible, easily measurable quantity be set aside?"


Dr. Shyam Sunder replies:

"Could you repeat the question?"

[the question is repeated by the moderator, leaving out the word, "competent" as well as the last sentence]

"Well...um...the...first of all gravity...um...gravity is the loading function that applies to the structure...um...at...um...applies....to every body...every...uh...on...all bodies on...ah...on...um... this particular...on this planet not just...um...uh...in ground zero...um...the...uh...the analysis shows a difference in time between a free fall time, a free fall time would be an object that has no...uh... structural components below it. And if you look at the analysis of the video it shows that the time it takes for the...17...uh...for the roof line of the video to collapse down the 17 floors that you can actually see in the video below which you can't see anything in the video is about...uh... 3.9 seconds. What the analysis shows...and...uh...the structural analysis shows, the collapse analysis shows that same time that it took for the structural model to come down from the roof line all the way for those 17 floors to disappear is...um... 5.4 seconds. It's...uh..., about one point...uh...five seconds or roughly 40% more time for that free fall to happen. And that is not at all unusual because there was structural resistance that was provided in this particular case. And you had...you had a sequence of structural failures that had to take place and everything was not instantaneous."
--------

Note that:
--He acknowledges that freefall can only occur if there is no structure under the falling section of the building.
--He acknowledges that their structural modeling predicts a fall slower than freefall.
--He acknowledges that there was structural resistance in this particular case.
--He acknowledges that there was a sequence of failures that had to take place and that this process was not instantaneous.

[altruismsuffers]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown


I would like to get the full story on the Kennedy assassination before I die.  That's where my generation's cynicism began.  I mean, we acknowledge there is still information being withheld and President Ford raised questions about the CIA's role before he died.

I mean, do you guys turn off the news at night satisfied that you have heard the whole truth about everything that happened that day?  If you do, I'm envious of your simplicity and your ability to trust.

Hometown thank you for using your brain and thinking critically instead of responding emotionally like most of these children.  I suggest that you watch JFK II http://myexpandedmind.com/Movies/JFKII.html  It does have some corny cartoons but the evidence they provide contrary to the official story is astounding.  

[dbacks fan]

""The fire was burning from the ground floor to the top floor of the large building, the flames reflecting in the glass facade of the main CCTV tower next to the hotel and cultural center," reports the New York Times.

"The 241-room Mandarin Oriental hotel in the building was due to open this year. Flames were spotted around 7:45 p.m. and within 20 minutes the fire had spread throughout the building, dominating that part of the city."'

Just an observation here, but WTC7 was built in the early to mid 70's. The one in Bejing was still under construction and was being built in a part of the world that is prone to large earthquakes. I don't think that you can honestly compare the two.

[Gaspar]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

No matter how unwilling to accept complex scientific principles some religious fundamentalists are, Altrusmurfers comes along to set the bar just that much higher.

I tried to start my truck the other day and it didn't start despite the fact many similar vehicles started just fine. I have been looking for black box devices installed by George Bush, Halliburton, the NSA and Colonel Sanders.

Sometimes when I try to make a phone call on my cell phone, it doesn't go through, despite the fact that they do 99% of the time. I suspect a conspiracy perpetrated by the land line phone companies in conjuction with Dick Cheney, the Coast Guard, and the Waltons.

If you haven't heard, the real secret agenda is from the Knights Doppler, or Cloud Elders as they are sometimes called. http://www.theonion.com/content/video/weather_channel_accused_of_pro

The Little House on The Prairie Waltons?
I always suspected they were up to no good.

[Gaspar]

quote:Originally posted by dbacks fan

""The fire was burning from the ground floor to the top floor of the large building, the flames reflecting in the glass facade of the main CCTV tower next to the hotel and cultural center," reports the New York Times.

"The 241-room Mandarin Oriental hotel in the building was due to open this year. Flames were spotted around 7:45 p.m. and within 20 minutes the fire had spread throughout the building, dominating that part of the city."'

Just an observation here, but WTC7 was built in the early to mid 70's. The one in Bejing was still under construction and was being built in a part of the world that is prone to large earthquakes. I don't think that you can honestly compare the two.

Yes, and one was masonry and steel, while the other was steel and glass.  There was no structural load on the glass, so the steel skeleton built well.  

There was also no concussive explosion like the tanks of two aircraft exploding over yonder. Or the shock waves from the collapse of two skyscrapers a hop-n-skip away.

But common sense aside, there's no doubt that GW's back in Crawford planning his next attack.

[Townsend]

quote:Originally posted by Gaspar

But common sense aside, there's no doubt that GW's back in Crawford planning his next attack.

Dallas

[cannon_fodder]

1 Question - would anything ever convince you that this wasn't a conspiracy?

I suspect the answer is no, hence - no point int the discussion.

[altruismsuffers]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

1 Question - would anything ever convince you that this wasn't a conspiracy?

I suspect the answer is no, hence - no point int the discussion.

Have you given me any evidence to prove it happened the way that "they" say, or are you just repeating what "they" say?  Give me some evidence outside of the official story and investigators which I am claiming is false.

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by altruismsuffers

I have one question, how does WTC 7 fall from "Thermal Expansion", and this building burned outright and did not collapse?  

Fire Consumes WTC 7 Size Skyscraper

"NIST!!! You have some splainin to do!!!"

Perhaps one reason might have to do with the fact that this buildings main structural elements were made of reinforced concrete? Another reason may be that it was of a completely different design. It also likely met higher structural, earthquake and typhoon, design requirements. etc. etc. lol

Small discussion on Skyscraper page forums midway on this page.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=145254&page=56

Blow by blow, from the moment it started till now, discussion here.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=164817

[altruismsuffers]

quote:Originally posted by Gaspar

There was also no concussive explosion like the tanks of two aircraft exploding over yonder. Or the shock waves from the collapse of two skyscrapers a hop-n-skip away.

OK you all keep talking about explosions and the tanks in the basement being part of the problem.  If you are gonna support the official story at least know what it is.

This is from NIST

Did the electrical substation next to WTC 7 play a role in the fires or collapse?
No. There is no evidence that the electric substation contributed to the fires in WTC 7.

Did fuel oil systems in WTC 7 contribute to its collapse?
No. The building had three separate emergency power systems, all of which ran on diesel fuel.

Why did WTC 7's sprinkler systems fail during the fires?
The sprinkler systems did not fail.

Would WTC 7 have collapsed even if there had been no structural damage induced by the collapse of the WTC towers?
Yes. Even without the structural damage, WTC 7 would have collapsed from the fires that the debris initiated.

[altruismsuffers]

Explain me this, Barry Jennings tells his story from inside WTC 7 BEFORE the collapse of the Twin Towers.  Barry Jenning's Account of WTC 7

Barry Jennings was part of the office of emergency management (Guiliani's Emergency Bunker)

P.S.  Barry is dead now, cause of death unknown