Another Steel-Framed Building Collapses Due to Fire
- Thread starter Brainster
- Start date
No steel frame building failed before 9/11? Or do they say fell? I would have to say all the steel frame warehouses that fell count as steel frame buildings. I have seen photos and I have seen remains of steel frame buildings leveled by fire. Am I wrong? Who else has seen fires that caused steel stuctures to fail? I have seen many. Get the newspapers out and search for buildings of steel bent to the ground in fire!
Look at WTC5, it was on fire and the insides did not seem to live up to the steel frame invincible statements of the 9/11 truth movement. Did they pour some water on WTC5?
WTC5 is used as an example of collapse due to fire. Did you know that Russell?
Fire caused a collapse of floors inside WTC5. How could this happen? Fire does not cause steel frame buildings to collapse according to the 9/11 truth movement.
The toilet paper factory looks in real good condition! Wonder if it fell?
Why does the world study fire collapses of buildings, since steel does not collapse due to fire? I do not understand how we see collapse of steel frame buildings and the 9/11 truth movement says it can not happen, has not happen, will not happen. Why is the 9/11 truth movement misleading the world?
I do not understand why the portions of the Windsor Building in Madrid collapsed in a fire and I can not use that to understand why structural steel fails in fire? Why did they build the new WTC7 with a concrete core? Why did the steel structure fail in WTC5?
Why is a fireman supporting a fictional account of 9/11 by kids over at LC?
Why does Texas play Rice? I could be a truther, I am asking questions!
This is VERY IMPORTANT testimony released from NIST two months ago
detailing the diesel fuel within WTC7
http://wtc.nist.gov/media/testimony/TestimonySept8_06.pdf
I would suggest that EVERYONE check it out.
detailing the diesel fuel within WTC7
http://wtc.nist.gov/media/testimony/TestimonySept8_06.pdf
I would suggest that EVERYONE check it out.
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
That is a lot of diesel fuel.
Trigood
Muse
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2006
- Messages
- 980
Glad to hear your personal testimony, jugi.NO RUSSELL.Russell Pickering said:Possible smoky fuel fires on floors 5-7 according to FEMA.
[snip]
NO FLAME.
There were flames pouring out of WTC7 from many many floors. Sorry I didn't have a camera and didn't snap you a picture. But I saw it. You've read my account. Flames were shooting out of 75% of the floors on the south side of WTC7. And that was at about 2:30pm, I can only imagine how bad it got by 5 or 6. I saw it with my own eyes. It was a MASSIVE fire. and there was tons ond tons of debris piled up against the building.
I've said it before that it was OBVIOUS to anyone that was there that WTC7 was going to collapse.
It was an INFERNO!
But don't worry, the next major disaster I'm in, I'll make sure to take pictures so you can visualize it.
With regard to the right-hand picture above, I had a troofer argue vociferously on another forum that the smoke that is clearly pouring out of building 7 was actually the debris cloud from the fall of the south tower, as it steamed up West Street, "just as it was about to turn the corner."
I pointed out that all other debris clouds that day had rounded edges that did not line up like a straight edge with the side of a building. Still he kept spouting his nonsense.
I further pointed out that the damage to WFC3 and the Winter Garden in that photo are exactly as they were following the north tower collapse, hence this picture had to have been taken after that collapse. (I actually looked up other pictures of those debris damages in actual library books, and gave him references, which he ignored.) Still he kept spouting his nonsense.
I further pointed out that since the blue sky is visible, clearly the dust from the north tower collapse has settled. Hence the timing of this photo is at least an hour or so after the north tower collapse (i.e., 11:30 am or later). Still he kept spouting his nonsense about the smoke being the south tower debris cloud.
When I couldn't convince him, I realized that these people, no matter how reasonable they may pretend to be, are living in an alternate reality. One in which they can make debris clouds and debris damage appear and disappear at their beck and call. Mamma mia....
That's when I realized I needed to return to the land of the sane, and joined JREF.
Last edited:
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2001
- Messages
- 15,963
And when the city Structural Engineer on the site said that the Meridian was in danger of collapse, would you have laughed and said 'that never happens!'
LashL
Goddess of Legaltainment™
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 36,711
No honest experienced firefighter would ever suggest that the absence of visible flames from a particular vantage point on the outside of a building is in any way dispositive of the state of fire within the building.
It's one thing for a layperson to make such misguided and ill-informed comments. It's quite another for an alleged firefighter to do so. The former is understandable because there is no reason for a layperson with no knowledge of firefighting basics to know any better. The latter, though, would pose a real threat to the lives of his fellow firefighters because his ignorance could actually kill them. A FF so misguided, uninformed and uneducated about basic firefighting matters would be a real danger to every other firefighter who works with him.
Any experienced firefighter will tell you that some of the worst fires they've ever fought were ones in which there were no flames visible from the outside of the building.
No experienced firefighter (nor any rational person, firefighter or otherwise, for that matter) would suggest that a lack of live video footage or a lack of timely photographs showing a given fire, somehow means that the fire didn't occur or that is was less intense than the firefighters on the scene described.
I'm sorry to say that I'm doubting Russell's claims about being a firefighter more and more. Russell, did you actually fight fires when you were employed by the Seattle FD or were you engaged in EMS duties for the Seattle FD?
It's one thing for a layperson to make such misguided and ill-informed comments. It's quite another for an alleged firefighter to do so. The former is understandable because there is no reason for a layperson with no knowledge of firefighting basics to know any better. The latter, though, would pose a real threat to the lives of his fellow firefighters because his ignorance could actually kill them. A FF so misguided, uninformed and uneducated about basic firefighting matters would be a real danger to every other firefighter who works with him.
Any experienced firefighter will tell you that some of the worst fires they've ever fought were ones in which there were no flames visible from the outside of the building.
No experienced firefighter (nor any rational person, firefighter or otherwise, for that matter) would suggest that a lack of live video footage or a lack of timely photographs showing a given fire, somehow means that the fire didn't occur or that is was less intense than the firefighters on the scene described.
I'm sorry to say that I'm doubting Russell's claims about being a firefighter more and more. Russell, did you actually fight fires when you were employed by the Seattle FD or were you engaged in EMS duties for the Seattle FD?
Last edited:
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
If you do go back there, point out that the sun is low in the southwest. It is late in the afternoon. As we know from all the photos and videos, at that time of day the smoke from the site was small compared to the smoke from WTC 7.
The videos show this best. They are undeniable.
You are amazing.
Seattle has a layered EMS system. ALL firefighters are EMTs. ALL paramedics are firefighters. You have to be in the companies first to get in the paramedic program.
I was an EMT/firefighter. I did not do the 9 months of paramedic training.
I was injured and resigned after 8 years.
My EMS experience previous to Seattle was for a private company.
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
Would you say that Seattle firefighters lie more or less than the FDNY firefighters who you think are lying about 9/11?
You're killing me here.
In 8 years I probably had around 30-40 fully involved structures of ordinary and wood frame construction. I never had an involved high rise fire as they are rare.
The audacity it takes to make the silly claims you are making with no knowledge is entertaining.
I finally watched those WTC 7 videos. They are great. They show the wind tunnel effect much better than the stills. Also, when the smoke periodically clears you see absolutely ZERO flame. There were fires down low like FEMA said and that was it.
The other fires on the other floors either burned out or were extinguished by efforts earlier in the day. The fact they were out is proof that it was not a fully involved structure.
You guys will just have to PROVE it was. The burden is on you.
The firefighter testimony is just as important as the testimony of explosions and possible secondary devices at the towers. You should be fair and listen to it all.
I will check back in a couple of days to see if there is anything new.
Russell
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
Russell, please answer. In your experience in Seattle, did the firefighters lie like these guys lied?
When the building came down it was completely involved in fire, all forty-seven stories.
–FDNY Assistant Chief Harry Myers (Smith, Dennis, 2002. Report From Ground Zero: The Heroic Story of the Rescuers at the World Trade Center. New York: Penguin Putnam. p. 160)
We walked over by number Seven World Trade Center as it was burning and saw this 40-plus story building with fire on nearly all floors. –FDNY Lieutenant Robert LaRocca
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/package...IC/9110081.PDF
...Just when you thought it was over, you're walking by this building and you're hearing this building creak and fully involved in flames. It's like, is it coming down next? Sure enough, about a half an hour later it came down. –FDNY Lieutenant James McGlynn
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/package...IC/9110447.PDF
I walked out and I got to Vesey and West, where I reported to Frank [Cruthers]. He said, we’re moving the command post over this way, that building’s coming down. At this point, the fire was going virtually on every floor, heavy fire and smoke that really wasn’t bothering us when we were searching because it was being pushed southeast and we were a little bit west of that. http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/9.../visconti.html
All morning I was watching 7 World Trade burn, which we couldn't do anything about because it was so much chaos looking for missing members. –Firefighter Marcel Klaes http://graphics8.nytimes.com/package...IC/9110018.PDF
The concern there again, it was later in the afternoon, 2, 2:30, like I said. The fear then was Seven. Seven was free burning. Search had been made of 7 already from what they said so they had us back up to that point where we were waiting for 7 to come down to operate from the north back down. –Captain Robert Sohmer http://graphics8.nytimes.com/package...IC/9110472.PDF
Then we had to move because the Duane Reade, they said, wasn't safe because building 7 was really roaring. –FDNY Chief Medical Officer Kerry Kelly.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/package...IC/9110207.PDF
At this point Seven World Trade was going heavy, and they weren't letting anybody get too close. Everybody was expecting that to come down. –Firefighter Vincent Massa
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/package...IC/9110222.PDF
Building #7 was still actively burning and at that time we were advised by a NYFD Chief that building #7 was burning out of control and imminent collapse was probable. –PAPD P.O. Edward McQuade http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-...-reports02.pdf page 48.
At Vesey St. and West St., I could see that 7 WTC was ablaze and damaged, along with other buildings.
–M. DeFilippis, PAPD P.O. http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-...-reports03.pdf page 49
[Note: the fires in 7 were probably not mainly due to damage from the south tower, but from the north.]
So yeah then we just stayed on Vesey until building Seven came down. There was nothing we could do. The flames were coming out of every window of that building from the explosion of the south tower. So then building Seven came down. When that started coming down you heard that pancaking sound again everyone jumped up and starts.
Q: Why was building Seven on fire? Was that flaming debris from tower two, from tower two that fell onto that building and lit it on fire?
A: Correct. Because it really got going, that building Seven, saw it late in the day and like the first Seven floors were on fire. It looked like heavy fire on seven floors. It was fully engulfed, that whole building. There were pieces of tower two [sic: he probably means tower one] in building Seven and the corners of the building missing and whatnot. But just looking up at it from ground level however many stories -- it was 40 some odd -- you could see the flames going straight through from one side of the building to the other, that’s an entire block. –Firefighter Tiernach Cassidy
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/package...IC/9110413.PDF
"And there's so little they can do to try to fight the fires in these buildings, because the fires are so massive. And so much of the buildings continues to fall into the street. When you're down there, Dan, you hear smaller secondary explosions going off every 15 or 20 minutes, and so it's an extremely dangerous place to be."
–CBS-TV News Reporter Vince DeMentri http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/91...explosions.wmv
Well, they said that's (7) fully involved at this time. This was a fully involved building. I said, all right, they're not coming for us for a while. Now you're trapped in this rubble, and you're trying to get a grasp of an idea of what's going on there. I heard on the handy talky that we are now fighting a 40-story building fully involved.
...And 7 World Trade was burning up at the time. We could see it. ... the fire at 7 World Trade was working its way from the front of the building northbound to the back of the building. There was no way there could be water put on it, because there was no water in the area. –Firefighter Eugene Kelty Jr.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/package...IC/9110261.PDF
The time was approximately 11a.m. Both of the WTC towers were collapsed and the streets were covered with debris. Building #7 was still standing but burning. ...We spoke to with a FDNY Chief who has his men holed up in the US Post Office building. He informed us that the fires in building 7 were uncontrollable and that its collapse was imminent. There were no fires inside the loading dock (of 7) at this time but we could hear explosions deep inside. –PAPD P.O. William Connors http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-...-reports04.pdf page 69
"There's number Seven World Trade. That's the OEM bunker." We had a snicker about that. We looked over, and it's engulfed in flames and starting to collapse.
We're kind of caught in traffic and people and things, and everything's going on. We hear over the fire portable, "Everybody evacuate the site. It's going to collapse." Mark Steffens starts yelling, "Get out of here! Get out of here! Get out of here! We've got to go! We've got to go! It's going to collapse." I turned around, and I piped up real loud and said, "Stay in the frigging car. Roll the windows up. It's pancake collapsing. We'll be fine. The debris will quit and the cloud will come through. Just stay in the car." We pulled the car over, turned around and just watched it pancake. We had a dust cloud but nothing like it was before. –Paramedic Louis Cook http://graphics8.nytimes.com/package...IC/9110103.PDF
Building 7 fire makes rescuer of NT stairwell victim’s route impassable (just before collapse):
I remember it was bad and I'm going to get to a point where we came back that way on the way up. We couldn't even go that way, that's how bad the fire was, but by the time I was coming back it was rolling, more than a couple of floors, just fully involved, rolling.
...So now it's us 4 and we are walking towards it and I remember it would have at one point been an easier path to go towards our right, but being building 7 -- that must have been building 7 I'm guessing with that fire, we decided to stay away from that because things were just crackling, falling and whatnot.
...He had called me and said “Hey Jerry don’t try and get back out the way you went in which was big heads up move because he said that building was rolling on top of the building that we were passing. That building was on fire and likely to collapse more too. –Firefighter Gerard Suden http://graphics8.nytimes.com/package...IC/9110022.PDF
I remember Chief Hayden saying to me, "We have a six-story building over there, a seven-story building, fully involved." At that time he said, "7 has got fire on several floors." He said, "We've got a ten-story over there, another ten-story over there, a six-story over there, a 13-story over there." He just looked at me and said, "**** 'em all. Let 'em burn." He said, "Just tell the guys to keep looking for guys. Just keep looking for the brothers. We've got people trapped. We've got to get them out." –Lieutenant William Ryan http://graphics8.nytimes.com/package...IC/9110117.PDF
I walked around the building to get back to the command post and that's when they were waiting for 7 World Trade Center to come down. ...They had three floors of fire on three separate floors, probably 10, 11 and 15 it looked like, just burning merrily. It was pretty amazing, you know, it's the afternoon in lower Manhattan, a major high-rise is burning, and they said 'we know.' –FDNY Chief Thomas McCarthy
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/package...IC/9110055.PDF
We were champing at the bit," says WCBS-TV reporter Vince DeMentri of his decision to sneak behind police barricades and report from 7 World Trade Center a half-hour before it collapsed. "I knew the story was in there." But after he and his cameraman slipped past officers, they lost all sense of direction. "From outside this zone, you could figure out where everything was," he says. "But inside, it was all destruction and blown-out buildings, and we had no clue. I walked into one building, but I had no idea where I was. The windows were all blown out. Computers, desks, furniture, and people's possessions were strewn all over." He found a picture of a little girl lying in the rubble. Then he realized that No. 7, aflame, was about fifteen to twenty feet ahead of him. "I looked up Barclay Street," he says. "There was nobody out. No bodies, no injured. Nobody. There were mounds of burning debris. It was like opening a broiler." http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/sept11...183/index.html
They are worried that number 7 is burning and they are talking about not ceasing operations. –Deputy Commissioner Frank Gribbon http://graphics8.nytimes.com/package...IC/9110167.PDF
There were hundreds of firefighters waiting to -- they were waiting for 7 World Trade Center to come down as it was on fire. It was too dangerous to go in and fight the fire. –Assistant Commissioner James Drury http://graphics8.nytimes.com/package...IC/9110098.PDF
My first thoughts when I came down a little further into the site, south of Chambers Street, was, "Where am I?" I didn't recognize it. Obviously, the towers were gone. The only thing that remained standing was a section of the Vista Hotel. Building 7 was on fire. That was ready to come down. –Charlie Vitchers, Ground Zero Superintendent http://www.pbs.org/americarebuilds/p...itchers_t.html
Last edited:
You will have to prove it, you have the wrong theory, you have no evidence
you should listen to eyewitnesses also, you only use the testimony you want, and you fail to go back and confirm. You ignore the raging fire eyewitness, but bring up hearsay stuff.
Russell Pickering says -----
"We should focus on the irrefutable evidence like the demolition of WTC7, the free-fall speed of the towers, Norad, PNAC etc., in other words, things that are WELL documented"
see you have to prove it you have the evidence, show us, prove any of this and you have a Pulitzer Prize, come on get the Prize!
stateofgrace
Unregistered
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2006
- Messages
- 3,843
Don't bother Russell; your mockery of this event is now becoming tiresome.
All grace that you have been accorded before is now withdrawn and you will be treated with the same unreserved contempt I have for the rest of your loony movement.
You have ignored all logic, all reason, and every question that has been put to you.
You have even had the affront to ignore a post from somebody that was there.
You should do well to remember you place from here on in. That being a disrespectful idiot who simply mocks it all.
I will no longer indulge you in your paranoid fantasies. I will debate with Chris; he may be crazy but at least he is honest about it.
All your pretence at being a "researcher" have now slipped away and your true self has been exposed. That being somebody who wishes it all happened the way you see it and you will refuse to see it any other way. A true researcher knows the burden of proof lies with him. This is your burden, pal, you have failed at every opportunity to carry this burden. You have failed to back up you claims.
Now scuttle off back to LC and enjoy the glory you so desperately seem to crave. Enjoy the company of your new found friends; you truly deserve to be in this company. You deserve nothing less.
Ex Fire fighter Russell Pickering, you dishonour those that were there, you dishonour the uniform you so proudly wore.
Shame, absolute shame on you.
Last edited:
stateofgrace,
I disgraced my uniform? Is there no limit to which you will stoop?
Fortunately I know myself very well and the pride with which I have worn both my military uniform and my fire department uniforms for a total of 17 years of my life.
You guys really get mean when confronted with a factual history of building collapses and a scientific explanation for the smoke phenomenon seen at WTC 7.
Here are 5 video angles of WTC 7 collapsing. Please watch them and post later the minute/second that you see any flame at all on any of the 47 floors involved in fire. Then explain to me the scientific principle that caused all of this fire to not produce a single spark in the collapse plume.
Do you agree a 47 story building "fully involved" in fire would produce at least a spark in the collapse?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8403741864603265979&q=wtc+7&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5101488991907845273&q=wtc+7&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3132857754400064872&q=wtc+7&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5269602441702932631&q=wtc+7&hl=en
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4SejBwgbCw
Actually, anybody can take the challenge. Everybody really should look at these just to prove it for themselves. Imagine the building fully involved in fire for 47 stories when you do.
Russell
I disgraced my uniform? Is there no limit to which you will stoop?
Fortunately I know myself very well and the pride with which I have worn both my military uniform and my fire department uniforms for a total of 17 years of my life.
You guys really get mean when confronted with a factual history of building collapses and a scientific explanation for the smoke phenomenon seen at WTC 7.
Here are 5 video angles of WTC 7 collapsing. Please watch them and post later the minute/second that you see any flame at all on any of the 47 floors involved in fire. Then explain to me the scientific principle that caused all of this fire to not produce a single spark in the collapse plume.
Do you agree a 47 story building "fully involved" in fire would produce at least a spark in the collapse?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8403741864603265979&q=wtc+7&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5101488991907845273&q=wtc+7&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3132857754400064872&q=wtc+7&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5269602441702932631&q=wtc+7&hl=en
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4SejBwgbCw
Actually, anybody can take the challenge. Everybody really should look at these just to prove it for themselves. Imagine the building fully involved in fire for 47 stories when you do.
Russell
If my word on the history of collapses due to fire is not enough lets review what FEMA says. This is just some of the stuff Gravy leaves out of his cherry picked articles.
You should be excited to know I am working on a WTC 7 piece to show you all of the stuff Gravy left out of the spoon fed info you received. You shouldn't be so dependent on one person!
You should be excited to know I am working on a WTC 7 piece to show you all of the stuff Gravy left out of the spoon fed info you received. You shouldn't be so dependent on one person!
Here is the source of the dark smoke near the bottom of the building that was caught in the leeward drafts on the building. It was a windowless (i.e- unventilated fuel fire).
Note they also seem to agree with me as far as photographic evidence.
Note they also seem to agree with me as far as photographic evidence.