10 story hole in WTC 7

[CurtC]

Start at 6:20. At 6:45 he says "I walked down to the 8th floor and there was an explosion!"

He didn't say "a crashing sound of metal being ripped out" he said "explosion"

But you've already seen numerous examples of people using the word "explosion" to mean a loud scary noise, whether or not there were explosives involved.

This doesn't prove that the elevator cars were ejected by an expolsion but it makes it a possibility.

No, it doesn't make it a possibility - it is no evidence one way or another. To make it a possibility, you would need at least some evidence for it. Since we could reasonably expect there to be some evidence if it were true, and there is zero evidence, it's pretty safe to rule out that possibility for now. If you get any actual evidence, we'll listen.

 

[tsig]

You are right, it's a poor comparison

Would you care to respond to post 138 or the following ?

The 10 story gouge, 1/4 to 1/3 the width of WTC 7, and the damage atributed to it, did not exist

Damage to the core columns is not known [NIST pg 51]

A few fire Chiefs [but not all] thought WTC 7 was going to collapse

NIST could only say that the collapse due to debris damage/fire "appears possible" [pg 50]

No one can justifiably claim the WTC 7 collapsed due to debris damage/fire with any certainty.

Yeah I can

I say the WTC 7 collapsed due to to damage and fire.

 

[uk_dave]

UK_dave said they are the experts who say WTC 7 collapsed from debris damage/fire with 'certainty'.

No I didn't.

 

[jaydeehess]

Start at 6:20. At 6:45 he says "I walked down to the 8th floor and there was an explosion!"

"I was part of the emergency management crew on the 23rd floor"

The OEM was evacuated at 9:44 AM
The south tower collapsed at 9:59 AM
This man was walking down from the 23rd floor sometime after the evac order was given at 9:44.
It stands to reason that the 'explosion' he is reporting on was the result of the collapse of the south tower smashing the windows and sending dust and smoke throughout WTC 7. We know very well that such occured even down on the first floor of WTC 7 when the south tower collapsed from eyewitness accounts there. From those same reports and others, we also know that in the immediate aftermath of the south tower's collapse that the dust and smoke was so thick that it was difficult or impossible to see well enough to move around, that it blocked out the sun for those in the dust. Thus his complaint that they were trapped on the 8th floor "with smoke all around us".

That's 15 floors below where he starts from and 15 minutes to get there IF he immediatly left the 23rd floor at exactly 9:44 AM. More likely, since there was no immediate known danger to those in WTC 7, he gathered up personal items such as jacket and breifcase and made his way out in an orderly fashion.
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1-81.pdf

4.3 EMERGENCY RESPONSE OPERATIONS CHRONOLOGY

8:46 a.m. An aircraft strikes WTC 1. (FEMA 403)

9:01 a.m. WTC Security receives a report of a fire in a parking lot. (PA/WTC Security Radio Channel X)

9:02 a.m. WTC Security receives a report of a gas leak. (Note: Incomplete message, location of leak not identified.) (PA/WTC Security Radio Channel X)

9:03 a.m. An aircraft strikes WTC 2. (FEMA 403) PAPD – by this time a PAPD senior officer has called three times for the evacuation of the World Trade Center, WTC 1 and WTC 2, and then “all buildings in the complex.” (PAPD Radio Channel W)

WTC Security reports that another aircraft has stuck WTC 2. (PA/WTC Security Radio
Channel X)

9:44 a.m. WTC Security receives a communication saying that “They haven’t evacuated the Fire Command over here in building 2 or 1.” (PA/WTC Security Radio Channel X)

9:44 a.m. (E) The Office of Emergency Management operations center inside WTC 7 is evacuated. (FDNY, interview 24, winter 2004)

9:54 a.m. FDNY radio communications on the City-wide, high-rise Channel 7 (PA/WTC Radio Channel 30) A Battalion Chief calls for a Ladder company in the A stairway to extinguish two fires. They are attempting to stretch building hose lines on about floor 78. (PA/WTC Radio Channel 30 recording)

FDNY radio communications on the City-wide, high-rise Channel 7 (PA/WTC Radio Channel 30) A firefighter calls to the Battalion Chief that he is on floor 55 and must stop to rest. (PA/WTC Radio Channel 30 recording)

9:56 a.m. FDNY radio communications on the City-wide, high-rise Channel 7 (PA/WTC Radio Channel 30): inside WTC 2, a firefighter states they are in the B stairway and that they will have to put some fire out in order to get to the A stairway. (PA/WTC Radio Channel 30 recording)

9:59 a.m. FDNY Marine unit reports the collapse of WTC 2. (FDNY World Trade Center Incident Summary, 2001)

Now that also is in the running as the absolute worst video compilation I have ever seen. The sound is so bad because it is the guy pointing his consumer video camera at the TV screen. Do I detect those in the room laughing at one point?
The "flashes", is this a joke? They are papers being blown out of smashed windows and fluttering away downwind for the most part. In other cases it seems it might be the smaoke parting momentarily and the camera picking up light reflection from remaining glass in the building. IF these are explosions then why no video of these 'flashes' from the north side of the building, just the side with all the broken windows and smoke?

C7 , your attempts to back up your claims are getting desparate.

 

[einsteen]

JohnnyFive,

What if wtc7 was not evacuated ???? One knew it was about to blow up, therefore it was evacuated and therefore research has no priority, it's so obvious what happened with that building.

From a OCT'ers point of view, all buildings with a similar construction as wtc7 are very dangerous especially when they are in the neighbourhood of high buildings.

I know what NIST's answer will be. I'm sure there are high-skilled scientists (also here of course) that also know it was a CD, they will never ever admit it.

Just found this on physorg http://media.spikedhumor.com/77860/building.wmv

 

[DavidJames]

I know what NIST's answer will be. I'm sure there are high-skilled scientists (also here of course) that also know it was a CD, they will never ever admit it.

I'm sure there are highly knowledgeable people who know you have committed multiple heinous crimes, they will never admit it.

 

[JonnyFive]

What if wtc7 was not evacuated ???? One knew it was about to blow up, therefore it was evacuated and therefore research has no priority, it's so obvious what happened with that building.

It was not about to "blow up", it was about to collapse. They knew that one pretty early on, and the building was evacuated. So what?

Research on WTC7 does not have "no priority". In case you missed it, there are multiple reports on WTC7.

From a OCT'ers point of view, all buildings with a similar construction as wtc7 are very dangerous especially when they are in the neighbourhood of high buildings.

What the hell does this even mean? Why would "OCT'ers" believe that all buildings of similar construction are "very dangerous"? That's nonsense, and you know it.

I know what NIST's answer will be. I'm sure there are high-skilled scientists (also here of course) that also know it was a CD, they will never ever admit it.

Provide evidence of this statement. You can't simply state things like this and just expect us to believe it.

Just found this on physorg http://media.spikedhumor.com/77860/building.wmv

And what, precisely, is the point of that video? It doesn't have anything to do with WTC7 or 9/11, it's an apartment building in Malaysia.

 

[jaydeehess]

What if wtc7 was not evacuated ???? One knew it was about to blow up, therefore it was evacuated and therefore research has no priority, it's so obvious what happened with that building.

Great, so the towers were not evacuated. Is that then evidence that they were not a case of CD?

That aside, you completely miss the point. It was easier to investigate the towers because there is a lot more data on where the original damage was due to the videos of the planes hitting the buildings, the estimation of the speed and angle at which they hit, the video of the immediate result of the impacts to compare with FEA sims. There is NOTHING about WTC 7 that can compare. There is no video of the damage being inflicted on WTC 7 the same way that there is for the towers. Therefore any research is at a disadvantage right from the start.

I'm sure there are high-skilled scientists (also here of course) that also know it was a CD, they will never ever admit it.

What causes you to be ' sure' of this?

 

[einsteen]

Provide evidence of this statement. You can't simply state things like this and just expect us to believe it.

If NISTs conclusion will be a CD then I am right and you are wrong, we will see.

 

[Arus808]

If NISTs conclusion will be a CD then I am right and you are wrong, we will see.

since NIST has basically thrown out that possiblity (they are only addressing CD in an attempt to help future projects to be prepared for any possible terrorisitc acts) you've been wrong from the start.

 

[JonnyFive]

If NISTs conclusion will be a CD then I am right and you are wrong, we will see.

Actually, I simply asked you to provide evidence of your statement. I will take it that your evidence does not exist, given your reply.

If the NIST's conclusion is CD, then I am happy to examine that in light of actual expert testimony, backed up by evidence, which has somehow been completely absent for the past five years. Even though that is truly unlikely, I am in fact capable of changing my mind. However, I need a reason to change it.

(You'd still be wrong about them never admitting it, but that's trivial)

This doesn't bother me, because I actually am interested in the truth. However, as much as it must pain the CTists, the evidence does not at all point to controlled demolition.

So tell me, einsteen: if the final NIST report indicates that the collapse was most likely due to fire/impact damage leading to a failure of the key structural supports (as the preliminary reports indicate), will you admit it was probably not CD, or will you continue to promote the idea of CD in the face of evidence?

So what was the point of that little video you posted? It did have a point, right?

 

[Coritani]

What if wtc7 was not evacuated ???? One knew it was about to blow up, therefore it was evacuated and therefore research has no priority, it's so obvious what happened with that building.

So the FDNY, NYPD, and PAPD were all involved? You better have some pretty damn good proof of this assertion.

And, if it's so obvious, why don't any experts agree with you?

 

[einsteen]

Involved, involved ? I'm no InsideJobber. Were they also involved when the twin towers came down because they couldn't find anything ?

No, nobody knows how a few criminals did it, it might be advanced technology. Jowenko of course, who blasts for 27 years, confirmed it was a CD. As I said before he is absolutely convinced the TTs where 100% gravity driven, he is no loon, CT'er, twoofer he just repeats the official story, maybe he would talk the same bull if he was intimidated by the wtc7 mafia. And there are some other professors who confirmed it (from Switserland I believe), and here is a peer-reviewed article (whatever that means) http://www.journalof911studies.com/...eration-Study-Proves-Explosive-Demolition.pdf

 

[Arus808]

No, nobody knows how a few criminals did it, it might be advanced technology. Jowenko of course, who blasts for 27 years, confirmed it was a CD.

Jowenko was shown a video, an that's it. He wasn't there to look at the evidence. and Im sorry but I'll take the word of the thousands of eyewitensses on that day, than of some dutch CD expert sitting in front of a monitor with "conspriacy kooks" egging him on, thereby influencing him and his opinion.

 

[Coritani]

Involved, involved ? I'm no InsideJobber. Were they also involved when the twin towers came down because they couldn't find anything ?

Just before we go on, what is your stance on 9/11? What do you think happened that day?

No, nobody knows how a few criminals did it, it might be advanced technology.http://www.journalof911studies.com/...eration-Study-Proves-Explosive-Demolition.pdf

It's fallacious to assume that such technology exists(but I can't remember the name of the fallacy - can someone help me out here?).

Jowenko of course, who blasts for 27 years, confirmed it was a CD. As I said before he is absolutely convinced the TTs where 100% gravity driven, he is no loon, CT'er, twoofer he just repeats the official story, maybe he would talk the same bull if he was intimidated by the wtc7 mafia. http://www.journalof911studies.com/...eration-Study-Proves-Explosive-Demolition.pdf

So, he's wrong about the Twin Towers but not about WTC 7?

And there are some other professors who confirmed it (from Switserland I believe)http://www.journalof911studies.com/...eration-Study-Proves-Explosive-Demolition.pdf

Names.

, and here is a peer-reviewed article (whatever that means) http://www.journalof911studies.com/...eration-Study-Proves-Explosive-Demolition.pdf

Peer reviewed by the Journal of 911 studies. Which has no structural engineers on it, IIRC. It was also created by the scholars because none of their papers were able to get accepted into mainstream journals. Which says a bit about the credibility of the Journal of 911 studies.

 

[einsteen]

Wrong, he has seen the damaged columns, he has seen the debris zone of the whole area, the Naudet brother's movie and some others.

The journalist tried to convince him (possibly for an hour) that it couldn't be a CD because of the chaos of that day et al, but he insists it was a CD.

 

[Arus808]

Wrong, he has seen the damaged columns, he has seen the debris zone of the whole area, the Naudet brother's movie and some others.

wrong

he saw video of the collapses of the WTC 1 and 2 and shown a video of WTC 7

He's never been to the site. ONly shown pictures, never told what the damage to WTC 7 and only told that it fell on the same day

 

[Coritani]

Wrong, he has seen the damaged columns, he has seen the debris zone of the whole area, the Naudet brother's movie and some others.

The journalist tried to convince him (possibly for an hour) that it couldn't be a CD because of the chaos of that day et al, but he insists it was a CD.

Answer my question. Jowenko thinks the Twin Towers were not a CD.

Do you think he is wrong about the twin towers, but no WTC 7?

 

[JonnyFive]

The fact that he believes that one guy's opinion outweighs all other evidence and expert opinion speaks volumes.

I've also seen numerous videos, as well as the debris shortly after the attacks.

By your logic, I say it doesn't look like CD and therefore you must believe me. As a bonus, I actually live in NYC and was there on the day of the attacks. I lived approximately two miles from the site and watched the whole thing unfold live on TV.

I don't even work for the government.

I do, however, work for an insurance company. I suppose that somehow makes me a kind of peripheral shill. I feel so second class now.

 

[einsteen]

well, at least admit his credentials, his opinion on wtc1,2 are also important for a semi-twoofer as me