Continuation: 'What about building 7?'

Crazy Chainsaw said:
Irelevent, there was paper and flammable material in building 7, your statement is totally fallacious.
Click to expand...

Your test was not realistic from a heat conduction standpoint or the thickness of the gypsum dust in the North Tower.

The air speeds in the collapses could easily launch small pieces of hot material.
Click to expand...

Sure but your small pieces need to either break heavy double pane windows in WTC 7 or find the openings in ten floors. All without starting any fires in the Verizon and Post Office buildings.

Explosions fuel air blasts would also launch hot burning materials,
Click to expand...

Where would the fuel have come from for explosive fuel air blasts during the collapse?
 
Tony Szamboti said:
I am speaking about items within the plan of the building. How thick do you think the gypsum dust on items would have been about 7 to 10 stories into the collapse of the North Tower within the plan of the building? Don't forget they used heavy gypsum wallboard in the buildings.
Click to expand...

You're saying a six inch layer of dust could settle on something in a collapse??
 
Tony Szamboti said:
I am speaking about items within the plan of the building. How thick do you think the gypsum dust on items would have been about 7 to 10 stories into the collapse of the North Tower within the plan of the building? Don't forget they used heavy gypsum wallboard in the buildings.
Click to expand...

The collapse I saw was quite quick. Just how long did the dust have to pile up in drifts six inches deep during collapse?
:rolleyes:
 
slowsmile said:
Sorry - just so we're clear - are you saying that gypsum dust was settling on surfaces within WTC1 while the building was collapsing?
Click to expand...

I am saying there was copious amounts of it within the collapse and that it would have choked off the oxygen to the fires and that hot material would have had its heat conducted away fairly quickly during the collapse.
 
Last edited:
Tony Szamboti said:
What do you think all of the falling gypsum dust within the building plan was doing?
Click to expand...

Then why all the heat released via the increasing thermal energy in the smoke plumb,
You do realize the heat increases during the collapses not decreases where is the tremendous amount of heat producing carbon soot coming from?
 
jaydeehess said:
Apparently continue to coat hot material for ten second transit time to WTC7 and, inexplicably, aid in reducing the temperature of that material.
Click to expand...

Nobody said what you are saying here would have happened. The gypsum dust covering and conductive cooling is said to be happening within the North tower and you have a very limited amount of material that would have been hot to begin with.

Now with those limited chances get that very limited amount of material all the way over to WTC 7 and have it break heavy double pane office windows or find the small number of openings on ten separate floors and don't do it to the Verizon and Post Office buildings.

On top of that make sure it goes far enough into the building and just smoulders for a while so that flames can't be observed for nearly two hours.

If you believe this is all possible I have a bridge to sell you.

The reality is that the arsonists couldn't start setting the fires until some time after the North Tower was down. That would explain the nearly two hours afterward when flames were actually observed.
 
Last edited:
Crazy Chainsaw said:
Then why all the heat released via the increasing thermal energy in the smoke plumb,
You do realize the heat increases during the collapses not decreases where is the tremendous amount of heat producing carbon soot coming from?
Click to expand...

The heat increase during the collapses is nowhere near enough to set fires. Physics professor Dr. Terry Morone wrote a paper about this years ago. You can't defeat the logic of what I am saying and are now reaching for straws and you have to know it.
 
Last edited:
Tony Szamboti said:
I am saying there was copious amounts of it within the collapse and that it would have choked off the oxygen to the fires and that hot material would have had its heat conducted away fairly quickly during the collapse.
Click to expand...

Conducted away by what and in what location? The material that was ejected from the WTC1 fire and impact floors was out of the building a second or two after collapse initiation. There was no time for the dust to settle on anything.. Have you ever seen gypsum dust in the air?
I had a friend who was doing drywall in his house. He had never done it before and used his Skil saw to cut it. When I got there and showed him to use a knife he had cut two sheets to size and the house was filled with dust that took a hour to settle out.

You want a collapse that IN TOTAL took 15-18 seconds from initiation to ground floor, to create dust, have dust settle to six inches thick on the very floors that are first involved in collapse, cool the material under it and then, only after all of this, have the material that was hot and/or burning exit the building and travel the ten second transit to WTC7.
 
jaydeehess said:
Conducted away by what and in what location? The material that was ejected from the WTC1 fire and impact floors was out of the building a second or two after collapse initiation. There was no time for the dust to settle on anything.. Have you ever seen gypsum dust in the air?
I had a friend who was doing drywall in his house. He had never done it before and used his Skil saw to cut it. When I got there and showed him to use a knife he had cut two sheets to size and the house was filled with dust that took a hour to settle out.

You want a collapse that IN TOTAL took 15-18 seconds from initiation to ground floor, to create dust, have dust settle to six inches thick on the very floors that are first involved in collapse, cool the material under it and then, only after all of this, have the material that was hot and/or burning exit the building and travel the ten second transit to WTC7.
Click to expand...

I don't recall saying anything about the travel time to WTC 7. You are though. I just said it was a long way and only a very limited amount of material made the trip and that the hot material was also very limited to begin with as well as having copious amounts of gypsum dust on it to begin with. I am also saying there would have been conductive cooling of the limited hot items before they left the North Tower thus limiting the chances even further.

I would also hope you realize that the greater the temperature difference between the hot item and whatever is cooling it the faster it cools. I seriously doubt any material that reached WTC 7 could have been capable of starting fires due to its temperature both because of the limited amount of material that was hot enough to begin with and the fact that it would have cooled down from that temperature very quickly when brought into contact with room temperature material.
 
Last edited:
Tony Szamboti said:
Nobody said what you are saying here would have happened. The gypsum dust covering and conductive cooling is said to be happening within the North tower and you have a very limited amount of material that would have been hot to begin with.....If you believe this is all possible I have a bridge to sell you.
.
Click to expand...
There. Was. No. Time. For. What You. Claim. To. Happen. Before. Material. Is. Ejected.

Now, was that a bridge or a castle in the sky that you built yourself?




The reality is that the arsonists couldn't start setting the fires until some time after the North Tower was down. That would explain the nearly two hours afterward when flames were actually observed.
Click to expand...
Castle in the sky it is. Sorry Tony , I'm not in the market for fantasy constructs.
 
Tony Szamboti said:
It is on the Journal of 911 Studies.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I can see where you get all your information from now.

No wonder you don't provide links for your "evidence"

In this communication I shall show that only explosives could have produced,

^^^ first line
 
Last edited:
Tony Szamboti said:
The heat increase during the collapses is nowhere near enough to set fires. Physics professor Dr. Terry Morone wrote a paper about this years ago. You can't defeat the logic of what I am saying and are now reaching for straws and you have to know it.
Click to expand...
... embers could start the fires, how do Gish Gallop around reality?

Embers from the WTC towers started fires all over NYC. I don't know why you don't understand. Oxygen, why did all the people covered in dust live? Means embers would live. Too bad, failed again.

Another lost Gish Gallop of dust. Unless the people lived because they were like thermite, and carried their own oxygen. What is your point? You are saying embers can't start fires? ... lost this one.

Where do you get those silent explosives? How many people planted explosives in the CD inside job fantasy version of 911; who are they? How do you find people who will murder thousands of Americans? Were the MIB in your fantasy McVeigh like, or what?

13 years, the CD fantasy fades as the Gish Gallop continues in desperation.

At least you showed the gypsum would prevent oxygen from reaching it and preventing flame, but your test lacked other realistic conditions.
Click to expand...
People did not get oxygen? Is this another fantasy? How did the people breath? You mean all of the WTC complex was without oxygen? Embers, are not flames Tony. Embers are the readcddeal.
 
Last edited:
jaydeehess said:
There. Was. No. Time. For. What You. Claim. To. Happen. Before. Material. Is. Ejected.

Now, was that a bridge or a castle in the sky that you built yourself?





Castle in the sky it is. Sorry Tony , I'm not in the market for fantasy constructs.
Click to expand...

It would be you who is talking castle in the sky by saying the fires in WTC 7 were caused by hot material from the North Tower.

There was very limited hot material and it would have been in contact with much cooler material during the collapse. There was also a very limited amount of material that made its way to WTC 7. On top of that it has to do it on ten floors and not show up for nearly two hours. And on top of that your hypothesis can't do the same to the Verizon and Post Office buildings.
 
Tony Szamboti said:
The reality is that the arsonists couldn't start setting the fires until some time after the North Tower was down. That would explain the nearly two hours afterward when flames were actually observed.
Click to expand...
Could it possibly be that in WTC 7's case - UNLIKE WTC 1 & 2 - fires did not get initiated by a multistory flash ignition with the instantaneous introduction of thousands of gallons of accelerant? That perhaps it took some time for the fires to get more established than it did in The twins? That perhaps those present were more concerned about search and rescue from the catastrophic collapse of two of the largest skyscrapers in the city?

You're seriously arguing that an absence of photographs to your satisfaction is evidence that something didn't happen? And then you turn right around and assert out of thin air that it had to be floating thermite and special ops arsonists doing stealth ignitions in a building that just got thrashed by an adjacent collapse and was at high risk of a fire hazard to begin with?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom