This is the thread that may very well change the way you look at 9/11 FOREVER!

[Architect]

I don't need to know how much thermate it would have taken to bring down the towers...

Yes you do, to know whether it was practicable to install. For example if you need 100kg at each joint - that's a lot - is there room to fit it? How would it be installed?

nor do I need to know how they would have gotten it into the buildings...

Actually, you need to know how it might be placed given the need for disruption of linings AND whether it was possible to get into the rquired locations.

to know that the clear and straightforward analysis I gave as to why the pouring liquid metal from WTC 2 - is thermite...is irrefutable.

Everyone seems to be doing a damned good job of refuting it, mate.

 

[Horatius]

I don't need to know how much thermate it would have taken to bring down the towers...nor do I need to know how they would have gotten it into the buildings...to know that the clear and straightforward analysis I gave as to why the pouring liquid metal from WTC 2 - is thermite...is irrefutable.

So, we have to provide you with complete explanations of how a building collapsed, and do it in a few paragrpahs using no big words or math, and making no assumptions based on widely recognized scientific and engineering principles, but you don't have to know anything about even the most fundamental requirements of your hypothesis?

Oh yeah, that's a fair and balanced approach to a debate......

 

[Architect]

So, we have to provide you with complete explanations of how a building collapsed, and do it in a few paragrpahs using no big words or math, and making no assumptions based on widely recognized scientific and engineering principles, but you don't have to know anything about even the most fundamental requirements of your hypothesis?

Oh yeah, that's a fair and balanced approach to a debate......

I'm taking some guesses at age and qualifications here.....

 

[Horatius]

What devices? And don't link to a US Patent office req/pat; as there is no requirement from the Patent office that the item being patented work. Show me a link to a functioning device like you describe.

I'd be willing to bet he couldn't even find such a patent.

And if he did, I would bet we could bust it in almost no time.

 

[28th Kingdom]

So the upper mass of floors...is taking out the core columns, the outer grid and the floors...all at once? Just say the upper mass of floors (above the impact point) was perfectly lined up with the lower floors (below the impact) and let's just say that all of the affected floors from the impact area...were completely devastated...no wait, let's just do this... Let's just hypothetically, remove the 8-10 floors that had some damage from impact.

At this point, we have the upper floors from the towers that are hovering directly over the lower floors. These hovering upper masses, are the same distance they would be if the 8-10 floors were still there - I'm assuming this would be 80-100 feet of space.

Now, if everything is lined up perfectly i.e. the core columns from the upper floors come down and directly make contact with the lower core columns...and the upper floors come down and make direct contact with the lower floors...what you are saying, is that when the ends of the upper core columns meet the ends of the lower core columns...all hell is gonna break loose? I mean, there's not even a chance that the upper mass will hit the lower floors...and just fall over to the side? You're saying that they would come straight down...and somehow make the lower core columns break...all the way down...some 70+ floors?

Even in this hypothetical situation...which grants the upper mass many advantages over the actual collapses i.e. direct and constant impact and 80-100 feet of resistance-free free fall space... I still find it utterly impossible for one building to collapse this way...let alone two...on the same day...within minutes of each other. Heck, WTC 1's upper mass was even half that of WTC 2, but that didn't seem to affect much.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

So the upper mass of floors...is taking out the core columns, the outer grid and the floors...all at once? Just say the upper mass of floors (above the impact point) was perfectly lined up with the bottom floors (below the impact) and let's just say that all of the affected floors from the impact area...were completely devastated...no wait, let's just do this... Let's just hypothetically, remove the 8-10 floors that had some damage from impact.

At this point, we have the upper floors from the towers that are hovering directly over the lower floors. These hovering upper masses, are the same distance they would be if the 8-10 floors were still there - I'm assuming this would be 80-100 feet of space.

Now, if everything is lined up perfectly i.e. the core columns from the upper floors come down and directly make contact with the lower core columns...and the upper floors come down and make direct contact with the lower floors...what you are saying, is that when the ends of the upper core columns meet the ends of the lower core columns...all hell is gonna break loose? I mean, there's not even a chance that the upper mass will hit the lower floors...and just fall over to the side? You're saying that they would come straight down...and somehow make the lower core columns break...all the way down...some 70+ floors?

Even in this hypothetical situation...which grants the upper mass many advantages over the actual collapses i.e. direct and constant impact and 80-100 feet of resistance-free free fall space... I still find it utterly impossible for one building to collapse this way...let alone two...on the same day...within minutes of each other. Heck, WTC 1's upper mass was even half that of WTC 2, but that didn't seem to affect much.

Read. The. Report. Instead. Of. Guessing.

 

[DavidJames]

I still find it utterly impossible for one building to collapse this way...

Please cite your educational and professional background which allows you to reach such a conclusion? If you don't or won't, then it's fair to disregard your argument from ignorance.

 

[einsteen]

But, mostly, the towers were built around a central core with the floors tethered to it and only supplementally supported by the exoskeleton. As the core failed, it pulled the building above it in and down. This placed increased pressure on the core directly below, caused it to fail and continued to pull the building inwards towards the core. So, there really was a force working to straighten the buildings. The manner of the buildings' construction actually kept the top floors from toppling over like a tree and pulled them back into alignment.

But there was at least a radial component able to damage wtc7 and also to kill some people on the scene.

As regards sufficiency of force, you should look into exactly how many tonnes of explosives in how many places would have been required to duplicate the tragedy of that day.

Is it not a big paradox that all people that believe no explosives need to be used also think you need to place tons of them in the buildings to get a similar collapse behaviour?

 

[Mercutio]

Is it not a big paradox that all people that believe no explosives need to be used also think you need to place tons of them in the buildings to get a similar collapse behaviour?

Nope, no paradox. Both are explained by the fact that these people know what they are talking about.

 

[Horatius]

Now, if everything is lined up perfectly i.e. the core columns from the upper floors come down and directly make contact with the lower core columns...and the upper floors come down and make direct contact with the lower floors...what you are saying, is that when the ends of the upper core columns meet the ends of the lower core columns...all hell is gonna break loose? I mean, there's not even a chance that the upper mass will hit the lower floors...and just fall over to the side? You're saying that they would come straight down...and somehow make the lower core columns break...all the way down...some 70+ floors?

Yes! Now you're getting it!

Even in this hypothetical situation...which grants the upper mass many advantages over the actual collapses i.e. direct and constant impact and 80-100 feet of resistance-free free fall space... I still find it utterly impossible for one building to collapse this way...let alone two...on the same day...within minutes of each other. Heck, WTC 1's upper mass was even half that of WTC 2, but that didn't seem to affect much.

Oh, drat, you were so close!

Consider chaos. "Senstivity to initial conditions". You'll never get them to line up "perfectly". Any slight imbalance will cause them to drift to one side or the other, any slight offset when they hit will cause imbalanced forces and torques, which will act to deflect the structural members away from vertical. Once they start to deflect, there's basically nothing that will stop them.

And even if they did "line up perfectly", wouldn't you expect some sort of rebound upon impact? Would you expect the whole structure to move straight up and back down, with no deviation?

And that's assuming the whole building acts like a giant superball, one unitary mass. It isn't. As soon as the columns make contact and decelerate, pieces of the structure will snap off, and continue moving downwards. This snapping will also be essentially chaotic, and produce uneven forces and torques, causing the whole cascading collapse thing again.

Your incredulity aside, dropping 10-20 stories of one building on another will cause it all to come down in a pile.

Please don't make me post videos of me jumping on boards, just to prove this to you!

 

[28th Kingdom]

Read. The. Report. Instead. Of. Guessing.

Well, as I have so clearly illustrated...and even had confirmed by a few here...the NIST is completely based on and founded in hypothesis....which is by definition, an educated GUESS.

*Please, don't quote this...and highlight the word educated. Thank you for your cooperation.

 

[CurtC]

Now, if everything is lined up perfectly i.e. the core columns from the upper floors come down and directly make contact with the lower core columns...and the upper floors come down and make direct contact with the lower floors...what you are saying, is that when the ends of the upper core columns meet the ends of the lower core columns...all hell is gonna break loose? I mean, there's not even a chance that the upper mass will hit the lower floors...and just fall over to the side?

No, there's not a chance that the upper part of the building will fall into the lower part, and stop right there, or simply fall over to the side like a Keebler Elf tree. Have you been watching Judy Wood videos on YouTube or something?

When the upper part falls into the lower part, even in your hypothetical scenario where everything is lined up exactly, the parts of the building right at the impact point will be stressed hundreds of times greater than their design loads and will immediately fail. This is so glaringly obvious to anyone with a brain that NIST didn't need to model it.

 

[Architect]

So the upper mass of floors...is taking out the core columns, the outer grid and the floors...all at once? Just say the upper mass of floors (above the impact point) was perfectly lined up with the bottom floors (below the impact) and let's just say that all of the affected floors from the impact area...were completely devastated...no wait, let's just do this... Let's just hypothetically, remove the 8-10 floors that had some damage from impact.

Yes, that's what we're saying, give or take a few fractions of a second. Let's look at it more sensibly:

The floor trusses failed. A 4 inch thick, reinforced concrete slab began moving downwards at 10m/s-2 (ok, 9.8 but close enough). The total load of each floor plate has been calculated at something like 1300 to 1400 tonnes. This impacted on the next floor down and caused immediate shear failure of the joints. And so on.

Now the central core largely relied on these floors for lateral stability - think of the whole building as a big box girder or space frame - and they too go. Some sections survive for up to 15 seconds after the main collapse, but that's it.

At this point, we have the upper floors from the towers that are hovering directly over the lower floors. These hovering upper masses, are the same distance they would be if the 8-10 floors were still there - I'm assuming this would be 80-100 feet of space.

I mean, there's not even a chance that the upper mass will hit the lower floors...and just fall over to the side? You're saying that they would come straight down...and somehow make the lower core columns break...all the way down...some 70+ floors?

You away and do a shear calculation on the above loading scenario and you'll realise that this is exactly what would happen. If you don't have the figures, then don't waste our time.

I still find it utterly impossible for one building to collapse this way...let alone two...on the same day...within minutes of each other. Heck, WTC 1's upper mass was even half that of WTC 2, but that didn't seem to affect much.

And that'll be based on what professional qualifications or experience?

 

[Big Les]

Let's put this really simply for him; you don't understand the issues involved, so you're extrapolating without basis. You're reaching, in other words.

You don't understand due to a lack of relevant education and training. That's fine, most of us don't have that. But unlike most reasonable interested parties, you also lack a will to TRY to understand. Therefore you look for the easy explanation, the short-cut to enlightenment (as you see it). Which is that "the gummint" did it.

It's SUCH a common theme across every sub-forum here; instead of striving to understand or admitting their shortfall in knowledge, the believer buys into the easy way out - a series of incredibly simplistic and ill-informed observations woven into a tissue of convoluted BS. Doesn't matter how complex it becomes, because it all comes back to one simple irrefutable truth; the government is deceitful, it wants to control people, ergo it's responsible. No evidence needed; everyone knows that authority is controlling, and everyone can see videos that look like they might show a CD. You don't need to prove it, just reel out the half-baked "theories" based upon feelings, opinions, and instincts inspired by just watching a video or reading a mined quote. It's not asking questions, it's not investigating, it's a belief system.

The more "exceptional" individuals concoct new spins on these "theories"; they at least exhibit some original and creative thought (though their motive is usually greater fame, cache and money) but the true mindless sheeple (to reclaim a phrase) just fall in line behind this, feeling part of something special and counter-authority. Making their lives seem just that bit more special, and by the idea that the gummint has overarching control over everything, making the world seem that bit more secure.

 

[Horatius]

Is it not a big paradox that all people that believe no explosives need to be used also think you need to place tons of them in the buildings to get a similar collapse behaviour?

You've been here long enough to have seen the math on this. The energy available through gravity alone is simply huge. To get a similarly huge effect from explosives, you'd need a lot of it. No paradox.

Remember, it's the twoofers who are claiming the gravity alone isn't sufficient. So if the energy we've calculated should have been there due to gravity isn't enough, you'd need even more explosives to produce the claimed effects. So if anything, it's the twoofers who have a "paradox" to explain - they claim to need hundreds of tons of explosives, but can provide no evidence for there existence. Which evidence should be abundant and obvious.

Instead, they keep dodging off to discussions of themite/mate, and when that doesn't work, superball theories of building collapse.

 

[28th Kingdom]

"The composition of the flowing material can only be the subject of speculation, but its behavior suggests it could have been molten aluminum." NISTNCSTAR 1-5A Chapter 9 Appendix C p.p. 375-376 (pdf p.p. 79-89)

That is a complete and utter LIE! The BEHAVIOR of the molten metal pouring from WTC 2 is not only PERFECTLY consistent with a thermite reaction...IT'S THE EXACT SAME COLOR - No Fairy Dust REQUIRED. Compare them for yourselves...it's UNDENIABLE. Even if you still want to say that it's NOT thermite pouring from WTC 2....you have to admit, that this molten metals BEHAVIOR is identical to a thermite reaction:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=545886459853896774

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEmHJORTlqk

This is probably the most important video analysis you will EVER do on the 9/11 collapse...so I implore everyone to watch these carefully, and PLEASE BE OBJECTIVE!

Thank you.

 

[Architect]

28th

Still waiting for you to address these pesky technical questions.

Come on, come on....

 

[GlennB]

There are devices that you can load the thermate into ......

Are there? Please provide evidence.

Oh, and by the way ...

<snip>
Does this look very familiar? See, the thing is (are you ready?) that once ignited (via spark, fuse or flame) thermite actually...get this...thermite actually turns INTO MOLTEN METAL! Yes, you read that right. Thermite is a chemical compound containing metal elements...and the really cool thing, is that once it's ignited by a simple flame...a chemical reaction goes off, and it can actually burn up to 2500°C -
<snip>

( my bolding )

Do you see what's wrong with your own argument here, 28th?

hint - check the bolded bit. Your words.

You didn't answer

 

[Horatius]

Well, as I have so clearly illustrated...and even had confirmed by a few here...the NIST is completely based on and founded in hypothesis....which is by definition, an educated GUESS.

*Please, don't quote this...and highlight the word educated. Thank you for your cooperation.

I always was a contrarian.

And this does highlight the fundamental problem with your entire approach to trying to convert us: "Engage me in a reasoned debate, but please don't point out the huge flaws in my arguments while you do it, thnxs!"

If you want to convince us, you'll have to do it by talking our language, using our rules, because, as has been shown over and over again, your language and rules are completely inadequate.

 

[Loss Leader]

But there was at least a radial component able to damage wtc7 and also to kill some people on the scene.

Without question. That's how much potential energy those buildings had stored. They could afford to lose some mass and still have plenty of energy left to continue the progressive colapse.