Merged Freefall is not evidence for Controlled Demolition

[Jaytje46]

Maintaining such a degree of collapse symmetry is not a reasonable expectation for a natural self-guided collapse.

You fail to explain your reasoning that free fall was a non-issue. You fail to show that the interior was “collapsing many seconds” before the penthouse fell (east or west). You fail to explain how a free-falling facade is a non-issue. In short, you make lots of assertions but make no attempt to support them with some kind of reasoning.



As anonymous Mr. Beachnut, you can make whatever claim as an authority you wish, but when your reasoning is BS or empty, so becomes your credibility.



Controlled Demolition normally relies on blasting away a building’s support.

What happens when you blast away all of a building’s support?

It drops at free-fall acceleration unless it encounters vertical resistance.

Without the use of human engineering, how could roaming office fires uniformly and simultaneously destroy enough building support to create free-fall of the interior or the exterior of a 47-story steel-structured office tower?

In both cases, controlled demolition (CD) can unquestionably do this, and “free-fall” would be an observable “sign”.



Aren’t all collapses gravity collapses?

You are saying that you believe that it is possible for roaming fires to self-engineer the collapse of a 47-story steel-structured office tower with the same appearance as that which would be induced by human controlled-demolition engineering. A claim that up until 9/11, had never been proposed, and to this day, has never been proven possible.

The collapsing penthouse is proof that the interior was collapsing before hand. And it did not collapse symmetrically, because the collapse damaged several buildings around wtc7.

 

[GlennB]

Maintaining such a degree of collapse symmetry is not a reasonable expectation for a natural self-guided collapse.

I posted a still of WTC7 collapse asymmetry , and many others have pointed to the asymmetric damage to neighbouring buildings. You have ignored these comments, so I doubt your sincerity.

You fail to explain your reasoning that free fall was a non-issue. You fail to show that the interior was “collapsing many seconds” before the penthouse fell (east or west). You fail to explain how a free-falling facade is a non-issue. In short, you make lots of assertions but make no attempt to support them with some kind of reasoning.

As many have noted, the 'free fall' period was preceded by ~1.75 secs of non-freefall. Your CD hypothesis can't explain this.

More importantly, the lack of a long series of explosive detonations and their attendant flashes tells us there was no CD, unless it was by magical means.

I presume you've seen commercial CDs on YouTube and the like? There are always those bangs and flashes (apart from the old-fashioned chimney stack demolitions engineered by the likes of Fred Dibnah, who just propped them up bit by bit with timbers then burned the timbers away)

 

[beachnut]

Maintaining such a degree of collapse symmetry is not a reasonable expectation for a natural self-guided collapse.

The dumbest tag line for 9/11 truth has to include the "collapse symmetry", proof 9/11 truth followers have no math skills, no clue what symmetry is. Proof science is banned in 9/11 truth.

You fail to explain your reasoning that free fall was a non-issue. You fail to show that the interior was “collapsing many seconds” before the penthouse fell (east or west). You fail to explain how a free-falling facade is a non-issue. In short, you make lots of assertions but make no attempt to support them with some kind of reasoning.

LOL, because the building failed in fire, when the interior support was failing, there is no support for the facade when it failed. But it is no a surprise 9/11 truth followers can't comprehend the lack of support... the interior failed first, it was gone.

As anonymous Mr. Beachnut, you can make whatever claim as an authority you wish, but when your reasoning is BS or empty, so becomes your credibility.

A first grader armed with cause and effect can figure out 9/11, why can't 9/11 truth. Thus you are right, my masters in engineering is nothing compared to the skillful used of critical thinking skills armed with evidence, a skill 9/11 truth followers and leaders don't have. As for evidence, there is zero evidence for the insane claims of inside job CD. It boils down to evidence, and the application of critical thinking skills - anyone can see 9/11 truth is evidence free making claims which amount to idiotic baseless lies; lies dumbed down for the gullible.

What are some tag lines so incredibly dumbed down to fool the gullible.
- Symetry, calling the collapses symetical reenforces the fact 9/11 truth is math free fantasy
- Come to think of it, all 9/11 truth claims are failed tag-lines, which fool the fringe few paranoid conspiracy theorists.

Bring on the engineering stuff; what do you have? nothing

Controlled Demolition normally relies on blasting away a building’s support.

Gee, 7 WTC failed in fires not fought. Fire can total buildings. Facts wasted on the faith based followers of 9/11.

What happens when you blast away all of a building’s support?

It drops at free-fall acceleration unless it encounters vertical resistance.

And do you have a point? With 7 WTC interior failing before the facade, there is no resistance when it fails. Bingo - but show me the engineering. What do you have? Nothing, same as remote control aircraft - zip

Without the use of human engineering, how could roaming office fires uniformly and simultaneously destroy enough building support to create free-fall of the interior or the exterior of a 47-story steel-structured office tower?

Darn you failed to read NIST, or the other work which agrees fire did it. You failed to refute NIST's work, can you drum up any engineering reasons for your inside job CD fantasy? No.
7 WTC center's interior was failing before the exterior, the total collapse took over 18 seconds, or more, thus your free-fall collapse CD fantasy fail due to timing; 9/11 truth inability to time the total collapse.

In both cases, controlled demolition (CD) can unquestionably do this, and “free-fall” would be an observable “sign”.

Where is the evidence for your fantasy?
Who panted the explosives in the WTC complex to kill thousands? I assume since you lie about 7 WTC with fantasy of CD, you believe 1 and 2 were blown up too;
Who did it, how to get teams of nuts to murder thousands? How do you keep them from talking?

How can you ignore 19 terrorists and 4 planes which did all the damage on 9/11? Is it easy to make up lies so dumb it hurts the minds of rational people? Lie about 911, is it your hobby, or are you fooled by a fake movement based on lies and ignorance.

Aren’t all collapses gravity collapses?

Fire caused the gravity collapses on 9/11. A fact 9/11 truth followers can't grasp... gee, maybe my education helped, my engineering degree helps; but you are right, a first grader learns cause and effect, and that is enough, a solid grade school education debunks 9/11 truth with ease. Did 9/11 truth followers' education fail?
Where are the sounds of explosives for 7 WTC? In the minds of 9/11 truth faith based followers; cause you and 9/11 truth got no evidence for CD.

You are saying that you believe that it is possible for roaming fires to self-engineer the collapse of a 47-story steel-structured office tower with the same appearance as that which would be induced by human controlled-demolition engineering. A claim that up until 9/11, had never been proposed, and to this day, has never been proven possible.

Fire did it, and you included a lack of knowledge of science, fire, engineering, CD, and a few lies.
Fire is able to destroy buildings, and has in the past, and will in the future; why does 9/11 truth not know the science of steel and fire?

Love the roaming fires nonsense, is that a new 9/11 truth tag-line for the gullible.

Oh, it was only roaming fires at the WTC complex on 9/11; fires hot enough to make people jump from the towers, but they were only roaming fires, not hot, ... not real fire, not fire that can destroy the strength of steel... 9/11 truth, a movement which mocks the murder of thousands with delusional claims of an inside job; and a movement of no evidence.

Drop the symmetry stuff, it really ruins any credibility (as does CD, and the silent explosives). Never say the NIST simulation does on look like the collapse, it exposes complete ignorance of engineering models, take if from the anonymous engineer, it ruins your credibility; engineering models are not used to create movies, they are used to study the structure in this case, and figure out probable collapse sequences. Talking about how things look is why 9/11 truth made up the delusional fantasy of CD.

Over 14 years of lies about the overwhelming evidence for CD; which turns out to be a lie.

 

[jaydeehess]

Maintaining such a degree of collapse symmetry is not a reasonable expectation for a natural self-guided collapse.

Wasn't symmetric. However, why exactly is the manner of its collapse not reasonable except in a CD? Please be specific.

You fail to explain your reasoning that free fall was a non-issue.

There has never been a cogent argument put forth that it is an issue.

You fail to show that the interior was “collapsing many seconds” before the penthouse fell (east or west).

Well, the rooftop structures did fall into the building. The building did see a kink form along the line of where col 79 would be, windows broke along that line as well, so one can logically presume that those rooftop structures were falling all the way through the building. Since there is no evidence whatsoever that col 79 did not fail low down , and since there is at least some evidence that it did, we can honestly presume that an internal collapse was underway before the hole in the roof opened up.

You fail to explain how a free-falling facade is a non-issue

You like this one so much you said it twice. See above.

In short, you make lots of assertions but make no attempt to support them with some kind of reasoning

Oh and you make so many coherent and well thought out factual statements, you believe?

You are what is commonly referred to as "wrong".

Controlled Demolition normally relies on blasting away a building’s support.

What happens when you blast away all of a building’s support?

It drops at free-fall acceleration unless it encounters vertical resistance.

So you are saying that a few seconds after the entire structure was moving, that the supposed perpetrators set off explosives to effect a free fall of the already completely doomed building?

Correct?

Without the use of human engineering, how could roaming office fires uniformly and simultaneously destroy enough building support to create free-fall of the interior or the exterior of a 47-story steel-structured office tower?

Again with the fire directly causes collapse? Who besides you is saying that happened?

]You are saying that you believe that it is possible for roaming fires to self-engineer the collapse of a 47-story steel-structured office tower with the same appearance as that which would be induced by human controlled-demolition engineering.

In any collapse, gravity works in the same direction.
As for the same appearance, you mean aside from hitting other buildings? Again, the owners of the Fitterman Building would be interested to know that their property wasn't destroyed as a result of the collapse of WTC7.

 

[Axxman300]

Which is what a controlled demolition would have done.

Nope.

Everything points to a controlled demolition induced implosion.

Nope. The opposite in fact.

Nothing to points to a fire-induced implosion.

Nothing imploded.

It was a fire-induced collapse, huge difference, and it was caused by catastrophic structural impact damage from WTC1 wreckage.

So again, nope.

Yet, because the observable evidence supports an ‘unpalatable’ inside job, flag wavers buy into the absurd hypothesis of a historically unique fire.

Technically, it was a historically unique fire within a unique set of events. This is why you and other Truthers choke when you lamely try to compare it to other fires, plane crashes, and whatever. WTC7 was unique, as were the Twin Towers. If anything, the fact that largely identical buildings were struck by identical aircraft with similar results proves science is against Truthers.

WTC7 collapsed over a period of 20 minutes, not a few seconds. There is no debate about this fact...at least in the real world...

 

[jaydeehess]

Yet, because the observable evidence supports an ‘unpalatable’ inside job, flag wavers buy into the absurd hypothesis of a historically unique fire.

Because the observable evidence supports an ‘unpalatable’ fundamentalist Islamic terrorist attack, conspiracy minded, paranoid whackjobs buy into the absurd hypothesis of a vast, complicated, overblown conspiracy of shadow governments with an agenda that includes carrying out such ridiculous operations, but which while sooper seecrit and sooper powerful, are also incredibly incompetent.


That's what you really meant.

 

[Criteria]

”Maintaining such a degree of collapse symmetry is not a reasonable expectation for a natural self-guided collapse.

”Wasn't symmetric.”

I never said that the remarkable degree of symmetry exhibited during the “8 story free fall acceleration portion of WTC7’s collapse” remained constant.





The two composites above clearly illustrate that the geometry of the free fall portion of the collapse had amazing symmetry for a 47 story office tower supposedly suffering a totally independent collapse from fire.



Naturally upon encountering the rising debris pile, as well as being effected by the WTC1 debris damage to its SW corner, WTC7's free fall descent slowed and it began twisting and toppling. The composite image immediately above shows this.

”You are saying that you believe that it is possible for roaming fires to self-engineer the collapse of a 47-story steel-structured office tower with the same appearance as that which would be induced by human controlled-demolition engineering. A claim that up until 9/11, had never been proposed, and to this day, has never been proven possible.”

”In any collapse, gravity works in the same direction.

As for the same appsearance, you mean aside from hitting other buildings?

Again, the owners of the Fitterman Building would be interested to know that their property wasn't destroyed as a result of the collapse of WTC7.”

Fitterman Hall was indeed struck by debris from WTC7. Examination of the WTC7 collapse videos show that after undergoing 2.25 seconds of free fall acceleration, the west end began tilting to the south and the east began twisting to the north. This is what caused the debris damage to Fitterman Hall.

 

[jaydeehess]

Fitterman Hall was indeed struck by debris from WTC7. Examination of the WTC7 collapse videos show that after undergoing 2.25 seconds of free fall acceleration, the west end began tilting to the south and the east began twisting to the north. This is what caused the debris damage to Fitterman Hall.

Which is just fine in CDs as far as you are concerned then?

Apparently you believe it was imperative to cause a "symmetric" onset of collapse, that saw the entire structure on the move, then, after it was already moving (ie. Doomed), it was then required to cause the already moving structure to achieve free fall,,,,,, but it wasn't imperative to steer the falling structure to avoid other buildings.

I seem to have lost track of why WTC7 received this rather unorthodox treatment.

You bring up symmetry as indicative of CD, yet CD does not require symmetry unless there is a reason for it. Usually a CD that has the center of the building destroyed first, is done to ensure the debris stays within a very small area to avoid other nearby structures. Now in this case the supposed perpetrators wouldn't give a rat's tushy about damage.
Are you suggesting they killed thousanss, destroyed billions of dollars worth of buildings, police and fire and recuse vehicles, personal vehicles, city busses, caused a stock market crash, but we're for some arcane, incomprehensible reason, were concerned about what WTC7 might hit on the way down?

 

[jaydeehess]

Naturally upon encountering the rising debris pile, as well as being effected by the WTC1 debris damage to its SW corner, WTC7's free fall descent slowed and it began twisting and toppling. The composite image immediately above shows this.

"Affected"
Yes, I mentioned the loss of the SW corner. It is you that has harped on the supposed (yet untrue) simultaneous movement of all four corners.

Looking at the western portion from the kink, there is but one corner to buckle,,,ONE. It buckles and the entire western portion will be on the move since by the time it did, the entire eastern side of that section had been moving for some seconds already.

So it's quite unsurprising that the western section corners actually leads the eastern corners in failure.

Of course the stresses on the eastern section are not too different in that the movement along the line of the kink is the same as on the western side. The floors tilt towards that kink. The major difference is that the distance from kink to eastern extent is shorter than from kink to western side of WTC7.
So it's unsurprising that the eastern corners failed very close in time to each other and only slightly lagging the failure of the NWO corner.

 

[GlennB]

Which is just fine in CDs as far as you are concerned then?

Apparently you believe it was imperative to cause a "symmetric" onset of collapse, that saw the entire structure on the move, then, after it was already moving (ie. Doomed), it was then required to cause the already moving structure to achieve free fall,,,,,, but it wasn't imperative to steer the falling structure to avoid other buildings.

I seem to have lost track of why WTC7 received this rather unorthodox treatment.

Because it was important to destroy the documents within while avoiding suspicion? So they demolished it in a random manner so's not to arouse ...

Wait. I'm getting this wrong. It was demolished in an ordered fashion so that loads of suspicion would befall ...

Nope. Still not getting it.

Can somebody please explain why WTC7 was CD'd in the proposed manner? Many thanks, in advance

 

[jaydeehess]

Because it was important to destroy the documents

A position that is absolutely idiotic from any angle.
The clean up would see dozens/hundreds of guys combing through the debris. A mechanical collapse as seen, would simply not be effective in destroying documents, or equipment. The later might be damaged to unusability but one could not be positive it would be unrecognizable.
In the towers, with its different style of collapse, top down, high speed rock crusher over twice the height of #7, it's a bit of a better bet that equipment is utterly destroyed,,,perhaps. Even that collapse though, saw papers widely dispersed across Manhattan for anyone to puck up.
Now fire can destroy documents quite effectively, and WTC7 burned on several floors for a long time. If documents were supposedly to be destroyed, then letting it stand and continue burning would have been much more effective than bringing it down. The longer it burned the more complete the destruction of paper or video/audio recording documents!

within while avoiding suspicion? So they demolished it in a random manner so's not to arouse ...

Wait. I'm getting this wrong. It was demolished in an ordered fashion so that loads of suspicion would befall ...

Nope. Still not getting it.

Can somebody please explain why WTC7 was CD'd in the proposed manner? Many thanks, in advance

Yep, not seeing it either.

 

[Criteria]

”Fitterman Hall was indeed struck by debris from WTC7. Examination of the WTC7 collapse videos show that after undergoing 2.25 seconds of free fall acceleration, the west end began tilting to the south and the east began twisting to the north. This is what caused the debris damage to Fitterman Hall.”

Which is just fine in CDs as far as you are concerned then?

What makes you believe that just because an engineering technology is normally used for peaceful purposes that it would never be used for sinister purposes?

The intention was to make sure that WTC7 came down down. The fact that CD kept it from completely toppling over meant that peripheral damage was greatly reduced and no other buildings outside of the WTC complex were rendered unrepairable.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Why was the intention to make sure WTC7 came down down?

 

[DGM]

Why was the intention to make sure WTC7 came down down?

The big question.

No "truther" I've seen has ever made a coherent case why this building would be a target.

The one I like the most is it's better to CD a building then use a paper shredder.

 

[Axxman300]

Why was the intention to make sure WTC7 came down down?

The CIA had an office in WTC7.

Sure, it was an office that nobody cared about, but obviously the CIA felt it would be easier to fake 9-11 than hire movers, or buy a cool paper shredder.

Obviously...

 

[jaydeehess]

What makes you believe that just because an engineering technology is normally used for peaceful purposes that it would never be used for sinister purposes?

Not even close to addressing what I asked.

The intention was to make sure that WTC7 came down down. The fact that CD kept it from completely toppling over meant that peripheral damage was greatly reduced and no other buildings outside of the WTC complex were rendered unrepairable.

Apparently you believe it was imperative to cause a "symmetric" onset of collapse, that saw the entire structure on the move, then, after it was already moving (ie. Doomed), it was then required to cause the already moving structure to achieve free fall,,,,,, but it wasn't imperative to steer the falling structure to avoid other buildings.

I seem to have lost track of why WTC7 received this rather unorthodox treatment.

You bring up symmetry as indicative of CD, yet CD does not require symmetry unless there is a reason for it. Usually a CD that has the center of the building destroyed first, is done to ensure the debris stays within a very small area to avoid other nearby structures. Now in this case the supposed perpetrators wouldn't give a rat's tushy about damage.
Are you suggesting they killed thousands, destroyed billions of dollars worth of buildings, police and fire and recuse vehicles, personal vehicles, city busses, caused a stock market crash, but we're for some arcane, incomprehensible reason, were concerned about what WTC7 might hit on the way down?

Greatly reduced surrounding damage.... lol. Right, because these perpetrators planned billions of dollars of destruction, world wide stock market chaos, thousands killed, but they cared dearly about causing further damage......
BTW how's it going with the Deustche Bank Building repairs? or St.Nicholas Church or Fitterman?
How much was the bill to repair the many other buildings such as
200 Liberty Street, formerly One World Financial Center
225 Liberty Street, formerly Two World Financial Center
200 Vesey Street, formerly Three World Financial Center
250 Vesey Street, formerly Four World Financial Center?
Your cognitive dissonance is astounding

How can you say no other buildings were irreparable? Shall we examine that claim or will you retract it?

 

[heymatto70]

First: The fact that the buildings damaged others in the WTC complex as they fell is indicative that they did not fall symmetrically. QED.

Second: The fact that many buildings outside of the complex were damaged, whether to the point of needing to be destroyed or not, is further evidence to the above point. proof

Third: The fact that all 7 buildings were destroyed by the attacks when only 2 were hit by planes is further proof that it wasn't CD.

 

[Criteria]

”How can you say no other buildings were irreparable?

Shall we examine that claim or will you retract it?”

I am not about to dispute the importance of the World Trade Center Complex building damage vs. that sustained by the surrounding buildings.

Regardless of your wish to pursue the inane, the governing point is that CD was engineered on such a scale that success was assured.

With profitability not at issue, the most advanced and reliable CD technology available could have been installed in WTC7.

The cleaner the removal of those lower 8 stories of vertical support, the less likely WTC7 would initially enter into an irreversible topple.

It takes either perfectly engineered and designed core take-out damage to prevent leaning and toppling, or the application of sufficient overkill technology as to make only the timing sequence the most important concern for success.

I have yet to see a plausible scenario presented that would explain how the combination of known existing damage and roaming office cubicle fires could result in an instantaneous common failure across the lengths of the N, E and W sides of WTC7.

This is one of the things that makes the collapse of WTC7 stand out as a CD. It defies credibility that fires and fate were able to accidentally engineer such a sophisticated and perfectly timed collapse. When you consider that the record for the tallest building to face a regular designed ’non-toppling’ commercial CD was the 26-story Hudson’s Department Store in Detroit, the 'non-toppling' collapse of the 47-story WTC7 is all the more special.

 

[NoahFence]

I am not about to dispute the importance of the World Trade Center Complex building damage vs. that sustained by the surrounding buildings.

Because you're unable to.

Regardless of your wish to pursue the inane, the governing point is that CD was engineered on such a scale that success was assured.

I assume that scale is large? Fine. How'd they do it in an occupied building? Specifically?

With profitability not at issue, the most advanced and reliable CD technology available could have been installed in WTC7.

How? Specifically?

I have yet to see a plausible scenario presented that would explain how the combination of known existing damage and roaming office cubicle fires could result in an instantaneous common failure across the lengths of the N, E and W sides of WTC7.

You can't see it because you can't see past your own asinine dishonesty.
"roaming office cubicle fires"?? LOL.

This is one of the things that makes the collapse of WTC7 stand out as a CD. It defies credibility that fires and fate were able to accidentally engineer such a sophisticated and perfectly timed collapse. When you consider that the record for the tallest building to face a regular designed ’non-toppling’ commercial CD was the 26-story Hudson’s Department Store in Detroit, the 'non-toppling' collapse of the 47-story WTC7 is all the more special.

 

[Belz...]

Controlled demolition, as everyone knows, best explains WTC 7’s balanced core failure.

Clearly, those who disagree must be in on the conspiracy. There's no other explanation as to why they'd disagree, after all, right?

Or perhaps there's something you're missing, and you're wrong? Is that even possible in your mind, I wonder?