10 story hole in WTC 7

[MortFurd]

If you look at the Naudet wtc7 video for example, you clearly see all structures on several levels are broken at the same time, this is a discontinuous process, there is no scientist who will ever be able to explain this. After this shockwave it fell with an acceleration of about 9.1 N/kg and the collapse was very complete.

I would like to see the math of wtc7. For the twin towers you can write a momentum transfer program, of course under some bizarre assumptions, but it has a basis that needs to be refined. For wtc7 the impossible became possible, there is no chance at all this can happen, this chance is even lower than the chance that a group of people lie.

You have a safe with $10,000, nobody knows the code of the save. 100 people swear they don't know it. Now the safe is empty. The theory is that due to the fact that the safe fell in such an improbable way the code has been typed because of mechanical collisions between the buttons and the environment. The best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. If some ******** between those 100 know the code and lie that chance is a couple of 1000 times higher than 'the best hypothesis'.

In a court of course it should be proved but if it can never be proved one needs to accept the improbable hypothesis. That’s how it is. It’s the perfect crime.

What are you trying to express in that bolded section? The Newton (N) is a unit of force, defined as 1Kg*m/(s^2). Dividing Newtons by Kilograms does give an acceleration, but you've picked an absolutely bonkers way of expressing it.
G (the acceleration due to gravity at the Earth's surface) is 9.8m/(s^2)

The rest of your spew is simply gibberish.

WTC7 was heavily damaged by the collapse of the towers. It was also burning. Witnesses describe it as leaning. Firemen were pulled out of the building because of safety concerns.
Simply: WTC7 was smashed and collapsed.

If a "quick and dirty CD" was needed, why all the subterfuge? Warn people, blast it, gone on. What would be the point of concealing such a thing?


On the other hand, who trucked in the tons of explosives that such a demolition would need? If you presuppose that WTC7 was not damaged enough to collapse, then you would also need a very good bit of explosives to take it down. Since you don't have time for the painstaking, precision placing of charges needed for a controlled demolition, you are going to have to go over kill on the explosives to be sure that the building comes down - simply put, you will need a bigger BOOM to allow for the crude placement (piled in the hallways and offices.)

Who trucked in the explosives while everyone else was evacuating WTC7? Who carried all of the needed explosives into a burning building? Who laid the detonation cord?

Most importantly:
Where was the ear splitting KABOOM of tons of explosives going off?

 

[MortFurd]

I'm no criminal, I don't know what happened, I just want the answer...

Occupied building ? My brother who works through the whole country always says if you wear a orange/yellow jacker and a helmet nobody asks you what you do. I remember that there are some guys here wearing mililtair uniforms, they went to important events, nobody asked them who they were, even one made it on a photo with a foremer German minister (Honecker). You look to difficult, people can do so much, is not impossible.

Yes, but if people see someone methodically cutting support columns in an occupied building (which will make an effin' big mess in an office or hallway,) they'd sure as heck check to find out what's going on.

Planting charges before hand is the same problem. You are talking about holes in walls and floors, all over the area where you want to cause the collapse.

Are you folks so seriously disconnected from reality?

 

[Belz...]

Maybe I trust too much on physics then...

Actually, the only likely explanation is that you don't understand them.

Ok, wtc7 (forget about the TT), I've seen only a few pictures with some localized fires, do you now want to tell me that there are no pictures of the huge raging fires ? I've never seen them and nobody has.

We've seen tower 7 engulfed in smoke from tip to toe. Where do you think THAT comes from ?

The crime of the century and there are no images of it, bizar.

So, BECAUSE it was the "crime of the century" (that remains to be seen) it MUST have show what YOU want it to show ???

You only will need to place some charges at for example the first two levels, where there are no fires or somewhere in the basement.

If you do then the building could simply topple over and will look NOTHING like a controlled demolition, contra what you guys have been claiming.

Further on higher level you even don't need charges, if you only cut the columns with a cutting torch in a V-shape (cones), a few man-minutes per column Jowenko said.

Patently ridiculous. It takes months to rig a building like 7 with complete, unobstructed access.

 

[einsteen]

It didn't look like a demolition; it was a demolition, by definition. The only difference is that OCT'er mention fire and non-OCT'ers mention explosives or something else.

Mortfurd, N/kg=m/s^2, they are both valid, I’ve studied 5 years physics, one year numerical mathematics and 8 years electrotechnical engineering.

 

[Belz...]

Just answer my points.

 

[MortFurd]

It didn't look like a demolition; it was a demolition, by definition. The only difference is that OCT'er mention fire and non-OCT'ers mention explosives or something else.

Mortfurd, N/kg=m/s^2, they are both valid, I’ve studied 5 years physics, one year numerical mathematics and 8 years electrotechnical engineering.

N/Kg does reduce to m/(s^2) I mentioned that in my post.

Expressing it that way (with out any good reason to not use the conventional expression) just makes you look like a dolt tossing out buzzwords in an attempt to impress the rubes.

 

[einsteen]

Belz, it won't topple if you blow up it symmetrically. It would not take 7 months, you think it happend 'naturally' why would it then take 7 months ? You contradict yourself with that.

Major smoke with minor fire, ever heard about smoke bombs ?

 

[einsteen]

Mortfurd, one of my teachers always used g=9.81 N/kg

 

[MortFurd]

It didn't look like a demolition; it was a demolition, by definition. The only difference is that OCT'er mention fire and non-OCT'ers mention explosives or something else.

Mortfurd, N/kg=m/s^2, they are both valid, I’ve studied 5 years physics, one year numerical mathematics and 8 years electrotechnical engineering.

:Sigh:

If it looks like a CTer and it quacks like a CTer and it waddles like a CTer, then it probably is a CTer.


WTC7 was demolished by the collapse of the towers. You paranoid people are positing that WTC was intentionally demolished by someone from the US government.

 

[twinstead]

Occupied building ? My brother who works through the whole country always says if you wear a orange/yellow jacker and a helmet nobody asks you what you do. I remember that there are some guys here wearing mililtair uniforms, they went to important events, nobody asked them who they were, even one made it on a photo with a foremer German minister (Honecker). You look to difficult, people can do so much, is not impossible.

Don't you think that once the building fell people might put 2 and 2 together though?

I submit that indeed rigging a huge, occupied building with explosives and/or exposing and cutting columns (even at man minutes per column this would take quite a while) with nobody noticing or even more significant nobody commenting on it even in passing in the subsequent 5 years since the event, while not impossible, is so much more unlikely than the prevailing explanation as to safely be ignored.

This coupled with the copious eye witness testimony by experts on the scene that day that the building was in dire shape leaning and creaking and groaning, and testimony of CD experts who with the exception of ONE disagree that it was CD, well to me is pretty compelling that the collapse wasn't CD.

But, I'm no expert. I don't expect my opinion to hold any weight. It's just my opinion.

 

[The Doc]

Major smoke with minor fire, ever heard about smoke bombs ?

You see the problem with you Truthers is you are disproven on a fact, so you create an absurd situation that makes no sense instead of admitting you were wrong.

So I'll update your scenario:
Einsteen's Scenario:

WTC1 and WTC2 were not controlled demolitions.
WTC7 was brought down with people manually cutting columns
WTC7 was also brought down with tiny amounts of explosives in the basement.
WTC7 had smoke bombs and no fire.
You claim that "natural" collapse is impossible but you rely heavily on it in your thesis.
You state that only key elements of the building needed to be destroyed - but claim it was impossible for fire to do this.

Come on man. Wake up to yourself.

 

[MortFurd]

Belz, it won't topple if you blow up it symmetrically. It would not take 7 months, you think it happend 'naturally' why would it then take 7 months ? You contradict yourself with that.

Major smoke with minor fire, ever heard about smoke bombs ?

No contradiction at all.

There's a huge difference between "huge honkin chunks of rubble and bad a** fire destroy building in hours" and "suicide squad cuts support columns in a couple of hours and lets building fall on them."

To do the job in hours, you're going to need a LOT of suicidal people armed with cutting torches. If they aren't suicidal, they need much longer - easily months, if they were covertly preparing the collapse prior to September 11, 2001 as you seem to be suggesting.

 

[einsteen]

Sigh.... smokebombs was only mentioned in order to show that not all processes with a lot of smoke involve a lot of fire. No wtc7 didn't contain smoke bombs.

Why on earth is it for everyone here (I say here explicitly) so self-evident that a building implodes itself in such a way because some random damage and minor fire. I really don't get it

http://users.telenet.be/netdata2/afbeeldingen/horen-zien-zwijgen.jpg

Please remember to NOT hotlink; use URL's in the future.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jmercer

 

[The Doc]

Sigh.... smokebombs was only mentioned in order to show that not all processes with a lot of smoke involve a lot of fire. No wtc7 didn't contain smoke bombs.

So where did the smoke come from? Fire maybe? What else to you suppose the smoke came from?

Do you agree that fire was responsible for the smoke?

Why on earth is it for everyone here (I say here explicitly) so self-evident that a building implodes itself in such a way because some random damage and minor fire. I really don't get it

Dude!

You say yourself that only minor damage was needed to bring the building down! The difference is you are saying that this damage could not have been caused by fire and that therefore explosives were used at the bottom of the building (that had a huge hole in it) and cutting torches were used by real live people at the top of the building.

Did you even read those links on the "small scattered fires" issue that I posted?

 

[twinstead]

Why on earth is it for everyone here (I say here explicitly) so self-evident that a building implodes itself in such a way because some random damage and minor fire. I really don't get it

Because your straw man aside, the fires according to EYE WITNESSES and EXPERTS at the scene was not minor and the damage was not random.

That the building fell because of those, and not some clandestine demolition team, just makes more sense to us.

It's really simple. It's not required that you agree.

 

[MortFurd]

Sigh.... smokebombs was only mentioned in order to show that not all processes with a lot of smoke involve a lot of fire. No wtc7 didn't contain smoke bombs.

Why on earth is it for everyone here (I say here explicitly) so self-evident that a building implodes itself in such a way because some random damage and minor fire. I really don't get it

[qimg]http://users.telenet.be/netdata2/afbeeldingen/horen-zien-zwijgen.jpg[/qimg]

Where's my Clue-by-four?
Try major effin fire and huge farkin hole.

 

[The Doc]

I would like to point out here that I am not agreeing that the damage was minor - I'm just pointing out a double standard on Einsteen's part.

 

[c6gunner]

So according to our nuclear scientist over there, firefighters don't actually fight fires - they set off smoke bombs, blow up buildings, and cover up government plots.

Well.

If I'd known that, I wouldn't have donated anything for the fireman's ball....

 

[Andúril]

 

[jaydeehess]

It's the first one [new footage]
[tryed to post direct link, didn't work]

Every time you are presented with someone saying explosion or describing an explosion you drag out your 'it could have been something else' bugaboo.
Can you acknowledge that it may have actually been an explosion ?

You might have skipped my post in which I assumed you meant the first link.

Post #224

Good of you to find more corroborating evidence of elevator cars being ejected due to (or at the very least at the same time as ) the collapse of WTC 1.
From post 224

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.