"Loss of strength due to the transfer trusses could explain why the building imploded, with collapse initiating at an interior location."
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf
Another Steel-Framed Building Collapses Due to Fire
- Thread starter Brainster
- Start date
They never mention that the slabs mentioned were compromised. Before you refer to the physical damage, please read the quote after and view the following photo (no fire at the damage area).
You guys really should try and hold Gravy to the same standards you try and impose on me.
You guys really should try and hold Gravy to the same standards you try and impose on me.
stateofgrace
Unregistered
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2006
- Messages
- 3,843
Yes you do. For you have abandoned your uniform and now have a new one. You new uniform is a trendy t shirt with “911 inside job” on it, a pair of sun glasses and a baseball cap. This you now wear with pride, this is your new uniform.
Do you wear it to re unions pal? Do you go there and look your former comrades in the eye and tell them all about what you write on the net? Do you tell them how you now wear your new uniform with pride and have made lot of new friends who mock this event? Have you got the nerve to do that pal?
I go to reunions, once a year I meet up with my old comrades, we swap stories, we have a little bit too much to drink and we occasionally get a bit weepy about events that have happened. For I wore a uniform and within this uniform I fought for my country. I fought down in the Falklands many years ago along side my comrades. I, unlike you have not found a new uniform; I have not turned my back on my comrades. I do this with honour, something you have abandoned in favour of ridiculous theories and new found friends over at LC.
The limit of which you speak of is the one you have sunk to. It is you that as lowered yourself to this limit, it is you that has turned his back on his comrades, it is you that has a new uniform.
It is you that has brought shame upon yourself. For you are unable to look your former comrades in their eyes with your new uniform which you wear with pride.
Next time you put your new uniform on, go out and join the rest of loonies that chant disrespectful garbage at GZ and try walking up to the firemen that maybe around and tell them how you once wore a uniform just like theirs but you have abandoned it. Look very closely into to their eyes and try to gauge the reaction pal. It will be one of disgust.
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 24,961
A spark? Well sure. So, sparks being not visible on low-res videos taken from several hundred yards away is proof that the building was not on fire?
I did. It's in all of them, but the one I left in the quote is very clear. Notice all that grey billowing stuff in that video? That's called smoke. Care so suggest where all that smoke comes from, if not from extensive fires?
Hans
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
In the midst of quite the hissy fit, aren't you?
In my WTC paper I quote, and link to, over 200 accounts describing the condition of WTC 7 and its expected colllapse. Those accounts are not my interpretations. They come from the people on the scene, most of whom had extensive training in relevant disciplines.
Please tell us specifically why you do not believe those accounts. One way to do that is to present accounts from comparable experts who were on the scene that differ from those I compiled. You've had plenty of time. What seems to be the problem? Can't you find any FDNY eyewitnesses who disagree with those I quoted?
I have asked you to do this several times. Time to stop running, Russell. The accounts from the experts aren't going away. If you don't believe the written accounts, then I suggest that speak with those people.
You can continue to act like a scared child, or you can be a man. The choice is yours.
chipmunk stew
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 7,448
for Russell.Belz...
Fiend God
Ah, the usual CTer simplistic vision of reality. If there's smoke, there's fire, ERGO we should be able to see the fire through metal, smoke, dust.
Hell, people in China should've seen it.
Ah, another person who believes that when someone disagrees with them, they MUST be dishonest because, let's face it, the evidence is SOOooooo convincing.
NO FLAME!
I see 8 floors mentioned here (since they mention 11 twice). That leaves 39 floors of fully involved fires not mentioned? That's just negligence in this report. Maybe you guys should expect the same standards out of FEMA and Gravy for leaving so much stuff out!
I think you should contact FEMA and chastise them for disrespecting firefighters? Does FEMA wear a uniform? What a disgrace.
I think you should contact FEMA and chastise them for disrespecting firefighters? Does FEMA wear a uniform? What a disgrace.
Last edited:
Oliver
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 17,396
Genlemen...
It does not help if we fight each other instead finding out
what exactly was wrong or false this tragic day.
Russel doesn´t have it easy in here with all people who
disagree. Making his live even harder by personal attacks
seems to be unfair in terms of what JREF is about.
Thank you,
- Oliver
Spins
Muse
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2006
- Messages
- 702
Why have you bolded that text above, are you trying to insinuate that FEMA think the collapse was caused by a controlled demolition?Russell Pickering said:
Anyways FEMA had a very brief investigation into the collapse, the current NIST working hypothesis for the collapse of WTC 7 is...
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/WTC Part IIC - WTC 7 Collapse Final.pdf
If you think that the above hypothesis is incorrect why don't you email NIST with your hypothesis as their investigation into the collapse is still ongoing? BTW can you please confirm to us all what you think caused the collapse instead of just saying the fire wasn't sufficient enough to have caused it?
Last edited:
SUMMARY:
1) No photos of significant fires.
2) No video of 47 stories fully involved.
3) No mention of 47 floors of fully involved fire in FEMA. (If that was the case don't you think the FEMA report would have been easy to write?)
4) A scientific explanation for the circulation of the smoke related to the unventilated fuel fires that FEMA did mention.
5) In relation to the fuel fires FEMA said, "Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence."
You guys should just stop. It is looking bad.
1) No photos of significant fires.
2) No video of 47 stories fully involved.
3) No mention of 47 floors of fully involved fire in FEMA. (If that was the case don't you think the FEMA report would have been easy to write?)
4) A scientific explanation for the circulation of the smoke related to the unventilated fuel fires that FEMA did mention.
5) In relation to the fuel fires FEMA said, "Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence."
You guys should just stop. It is looking bad.
Belz...
Fiend God
I do believe 20 floors had severe damage.
Also, notice how narrow the building is from that angle. Seems like that damage from that direction would be more crippling.
Just so you know - I am still very good friends with many of my old firefighter friends. They think I "walk to the beat of a different drummer" as they put it, but many of them agree with me about the collapses. If you even want to know more truth - some of them were there and heard a lot of Ground Zero rumors and at first came back believing secondary devices had been used.
They have even come to Wyoming to visit me and have read my website and are very open to discussing it.
Don't you ever get tired of looking incompetent????
Last edited:
chipmunk stew
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 7,448
Russell, why, when there is a much more comprehensive analysis available, do you keep referencing a May 2002 study with the subtitle "Data Collection, Preliminary Observations, and Recommendations"?
Spins
Muse
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2006
- Messages
- 702
If the current NIST working hypothesis for the collapse of WTC 7 is incorrect in your opinion what do you think caused the collapse?
chipmunk stew
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 7,448
Clearly the building was on fire. You're not denying that, are you?
So you don't accept that "fully involved" is a fair description. So what? How does merely being "somewhat involved" for several hours contradict the big picture?:
The building was burning uncontrollably; it had suffered some degree of structural damage; the people on the ground noticed signs of impending collapse and were clearly concerned about it; and few who had been following its progress were surprised when it finally did.
stateofgrace
Unregistered
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2006
- Messages
- 3,843
No I don't so why don't you enlighten me?
What happened pal?
Right now tell me what happened inside WTC 7.
(BTW marching to a different tune normally means they think you are harmless, but a loony nevertheless.)
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
Sorry, creep, the evidence isn't going away because you want it to.
Chief of Operations Daniel Nigro:
"The biggest decision we had to make was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged [WTC 7] building. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building’s integrity was in serious doubt." Fire Engineering magazine, 10/2002]
In another interview, Chief Nigro says,
"The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was [that] the collapse [Of the WTC towers] had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street. It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [wouldn't] lose any more people. We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was [given], at 5:30 in the afternoon, 7 World Trade Center collapsed completely." http://tinyurl.com/g8c6y
Why is Chief Nigro wrong, Russell?
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:
I am aware of the various posts here. Don't feel left out if I didn't respond. It is just that I didn't take it seriously.
Examples:
1) The forset fire analogy.
2) The idea I might believe FEMA believes the building was explosively imploded.
I am sorry about the slight change in demeanor, but you guys have dipped so low that I just have to toughen up a bit.
I tried intelligent kind discussion, but now I am turning down my IQ and ignoring idiocy!
Examples:
1) The forset fire analogy.
2) The idea I might believe FEMA believes the building was explosively imploded.
I am sorry about the slight change in demeanor, but you guys have dipped so low that I just have to toughen up a bit.
I tried intelligent kind discussion, but now I am turning down my IQ and ignoring idiocy!