10 story hole in WTC 7

[Christopher7]

No because we are talking about the Salomon brothers piping system and tank as I explained. See post #1328
I am not talking about the base building distrubtion system on the other side of the 5th.
Again as previously shown, there is evidence.

Wrong.
In the link you posted there is NO mention of evidence to back up the 'fuel pipe broke at the valve' hypothesis.

The SSB system fuel tanks, pumps, risers and 5 of it's 9 generators were at the west end of WTC 7. [FEMA pg 14]
As a matter of fact, all the tanks, pumps and risers were located at the west end except for the north east SSB generators in the north east corner. [FEMA pg 14]
The valve in question was in the generator room at the north east corner of WTC 7, on the opposite end of the building from where all the heavy debris damage occurred. [FEMA pg 14]

See post #1329 where i point out that Mr. Sunder testifies:
[pg 3 on pg counter]
"One possibility being considered in the working hypothesis is that impact.....may have resulted in fractures in the fuel piping system......at the valve box that would release fuel under pressure that, if ignited....."

 

[jaydeehess]

post 1219
It is a very real fact that there were NO diesel fuel fires in the area of the initiating event.

FEMA pg 28
"there is no physical, photographic or other evidence to substantiate or refute the discharge of fuel oil from the piping system"

in response to the definitive nature of the FEMA statement

Definitive enough to make the definitive nature of Chris' statement wrong.

Chris , you made the statement that there was no fire in that area and claimed it was FACT.

I am pointing out that you simply have no basis to make the definitive statement that there was no fire near the initiating event.

One need only look at the location of the elevators and the columns to see that damage to columns 76,77,78 could be done by whatever ejected the elevator cars and that a fire between row 76-77-78 and 79-80-81 would put stress on the very columns that are in question. Damage on the 8th floor to one set of columns would put added stress on nearby columns. Those columns becoming heavily stressed by fire on any floor below the 8th would put additional torsion and compressive stress on nearby columns including the ones damaged on the 8th floor. Damage to the transfer trusses would put more stress on this complex system, stresses that would never have been anticipated by the designers as coming from any normal fire.

An elevator shaft runs next to the stairwell in the east core and there were reports that witnesses felt cracks in the walls of the stairwells. That would be consistent with damage to the columns near the stairwells/elevator bank.



Everything you twist to attempt to make it FACT is just that, your attempt to twist everything and anything in order to eliminate a debris/fire cause of the collapse in the vain hope that doing so will leave only explosive demolition as the cause of collapse. You simply ignore that it takes much less to destroy the flimsy 'evidence' you put forward as showing that it was a controlled , explosive demolition. You have utterly failed to provide anything of substance to back up your contention of explosives, any explosive, anywhere in the building.

You have been shown the statements that state that there is unaccounted for fuel, it was not in the tank, was not in the soil and did not burn off in the vicinity of the tank. You have been informed that partial fracture of the piping system need not be the result of a direct hit on the pipe. Do you take this information and understand that it does indeed provide circumstantial corroboration for a fuel fire on 5th floor? No, instead you choose to brush it aside as not being conclusive.

Odd then that you can claim that 'sounds like' or 'looks like' makes your theory any more plausible.
Its unabashed sophistry.

 

[Kent1]

Wrong.
In the link you posted there is NO mention of evidence to back up the 'fuel pipe broke at the valve' hypothesis.

The SSB system fuel tanks, pumps, risers and 5 of it's 9 generators were at the west end of WTC 7. [FEMA pg 14]
As a matter of fact, all the tanks, pumps and risers were located at the west end except for the north east SSB generators in the north east corner. [FEMA pg 14]
The valve in question was in the generator room at the north east corner of WTC 7, on the opposite end of the building from where all the heavy debris damage occurred. [FEMA pg 14]

See post #1329 where i point out that Mr. Sunder testifies:
[pg 3 on pg counter]
"One possibility being considered in the working hypothesis is that impact.....may have resulted in fractures in the fuel piping system......at the valve box that would release fuel under pressure that, if ignited....."

I'm going to eat crow, generators 5-7 were in the southwest.
(1-4 northeast 8-9 northwest 5-7 southwest)
As for Mr. Sunder, I have no problem with his statements.

 

[twinstead]

Odd then that you can claim that 'sounds like' or 'looks like' makes your theory any more plausible.
Its unabashed sophistry.

LOL ya think? This double standard as far as evidence is concerned is very interesting.

 

[Christopher7]

in response to the definitive nature of the FEMA statement

Chris , you made the statement that there was no fire in that area and claimed it was FACT.

I am pointing out that you simply have no basis to make the definitive statement that there was no fire near the initiating event.

No diesel fuel fires.

One need only look at the location of the elevators and the columns to see that damage to columns 76,77,78 could be done by whatever ejected the elevator cars and that a fire between row 76-77-78 and 79-80-81 would put stress on the very columns that are in question.

No.
Columns 76, 77 and 78 were well beyond the elevator shafts.

Steve Spak's graphic shows the
"large debris hole near center of south face around floor 14" is centered on column 7 [21 NIST]
It is not known which elevator cars were ejected.
If debris ejected the elevator cars, they were most likely the ones in column row 70 - 72.

An elevator shaft runs next to the stairwell in the east core and there were reports that witnesses felt cracks in the walls of the stairwells. That would be consistent with damage to the columns near the stairwells/elevator bank.

That crack in the wall was on floors 27 - 30.
No mention of cracks on any other floors.

Everything you twist to attempt to make it FACT is just that. Your attempt to twist everything

Talk to yourself much?

You have been shown the statements that state that there is unaccounted for fuel, it was not in the tank, was not in the soil and did not burn off in the vicinity of the tank.

You don't know where the fuel burned.

You have been informed that partial fracture of the piping system need not be the result of a direct hit on the pipe.

That is pure speculation. There is NO evidence to support that speculation.
Debris damage to the west half of the south face may have broken a fuel pipe in that area but not in the opposite end of the building. IMO

 

[Christopher7]

I'm going to eat crow, generators 5-7 were in the southwest.
(1-4 northeast 8-9 northwest 5-7 southwest)
As for Mr. Sunder, I have no problem with his statements.

Thank you for your honesty.

By "no problem" do you mean you understand that he is talking about a possibility and there is NO evidence to support that hypothesis?

 

[Christopher7]

the fires on floors 7, 12 and 13 had burned out

I see your X-ray vision is better than mine.

I find your reply intuitive and eloquently sarcastic.

By 4:45 the fire on floor 12 had burned out because it had run out of fuel.
However, the fires on floors 7 and 13 still had fuel to burn so they may have been burning in the center or south side.

 

[Miragememories]

Now thats just utter bullshiat. Ive seen plenty of incidents of complete and catastrophic building collapse with no warning at all. Your argument of incredulity doesn't fly here. The only one afraid is you. I don't know how your doing it but you are rapidly losing brain cells.

SOURCES PLEASE! A W Smith

MM

 

[A W Smith]

SOURCES PLEASE! A W Smith

MM

Brooklyn Building Collapse Questions

Reconnaissance of the Elks Lodge Building Collapse

Building collapse in Alexandria

Building Collapse Kills One, Injures Six

Building Collapse Kills Baby and Traps 4 in Greenwich Village

 

[twinstead]

That is pure speculation. There is NO evidence to support that speculation.
Debris damage to the west half of the south face may have broken a fuel pipe in that area but not in the opposite end of the building. IMO

I find it ironic that a member of a movement that bases almost its entire premise on pure speculation would have the guts to even say something like that. IMO

 

[Christopher7]

I find it ironic that a member of a movement that bases almost its entire premise on pure speculation would have the guts to even say something like that. IMO

Yes, isn't it ironic?

The point is:

The 'debris damage and fire caused the collapse of WTC 7' hypothesis
is entirely based on pure speculation.

 

[Arus808]

which is STILL Being investigated! get that through your thick skull.

 

[Christopher7]

which is STILL Being investigated! get that through your thick skull.

At this point there is nothing to back up the claim you make that debris damage/fire caused the collapse.

Will you and the other OT'ers here stop making this claim and admit that your theory is based on speculation, until the 'final report' comes out?

 

[Arus808]

At this point there is nothing to back up the claim you make that debris damage/fire caused the collapse.

Will you and the other OT'ers here stop making this claim and admit that your theory is based on speculation, until the 'final report' comes out?

I guess you missed the many posts that allude that we will base our claims when the final report is out, and that none of things we say about WTC 7 is concrete, and we are only going on what is available (the preliminary report) about what is being said about wtc 7

You also have to put that to yourself, Christopher 7. you can't make claims about anything based on the words found in a preliminary report and a report (FEMA) did that pretty much left it up to NIST to finish.

Will you stop making claims and assertions about non existent holes based on speculation, until the final report comes out?

 

[Christopher7]

I guess you missed the many posts that allude that we will base our claims when the final report is out, and that none of things we say about WTC 7 is concrete, and we are only going on what is available (the preliminary report) about what is being said about wtc 7

Thank you for you honesty, few here will admit that the DD/F theory is not concrete.

You also have to put that to yourself, Christopher 7. you can't make claims about anything based on the words found in a preliminary report and a report (FEMA) did that pretty much left it up to NIST to finish.

When will you get it thru your head that the data about where the diesel fuel pipes and generators were, is not going to change in the final report.
Why do you say i can't make any claims based on this data?

 

[Arus808]

HOW
DO
YOU
KNOW?

 

[mortimer]

Right. It was NOT in the area of the initiating event

Right again. The diesel fires were in the west half of the building.
I listed the location and progression of the office fires in the east half of the building where the initiating event occurred.

Good point
but the initiating event was below floor 13

True
However, there was NO damage reported to the part of the south wall in front of the area of the initiating event

And yet you have failed to provide any evidence that there would necessarily have to be fire and/or debris damage in the area of the initiating event for said fire and/or debris damage to have caused the initiating event.

 

[Christopher7]

And yet you have failed to provide any evidence that there would necessarily have to be fire and/or debris damage in the area of the initiating event for said fire and/or debris damage to have caused the initiating event.

Actually, debris damage and fire is essential to the NIST hypothesis.

Without the debris damage to the core columns and the diesel fuel fires, the hypothesis falls apart.

 

[Christopher7]

HOW
DO
YOU
KNOW?

Get real!

Do you think that NIST is so totally incompetent that they couldn't get the location of the tanks, pipes, risers and generators right?

Are you saying we should disregard the entire report as rubbish?

 

[Arus808]

Are you saying we should disregard the entire report as rubbish?

No, Im saying that you should treat any preliminary report and what it says as that. a PRELIMINARY finding of what they have investigated thus far. As more things come to light and the more investigation they do brings out more facts, the statements made in the preliminary report can be changed.

Im not saying that they are going to change what is already FACTUALLY supported (ie the exact positions of the tanks). however, anything else that is speculated (ie possible, probable, likely) that is littered through the report should only be taken at that. POSSIBLE. PROBABLE and LIKELY.


So, I hold you to the same degree of "speculation" as you hold us. YOU are speculating basing on the speculations of a preliminary report. Essentially, you're turning their speculation into "they said this, so it must be true" and trying to win an argument by that logic.