10 story hole in WTC 7

[cloudshipsrule]

That's the evidence.

Debris damage to the other end of the building,

and fires that a burned on a few floors, for a few hours, in the area where the collapse began.



Is anyone here willing to acknowledge that the evidence does not support the "DD/F caused the collapse" hypothesis?

Neither you nor NIST know the true extent of damage which occured inside WTC7 due to debris, and you keep down-playing the significance of the fires. It wasn't just a few hours. It was nearly all day. DD/F induced collapse initiation CANNOT be ruled out, AND IS THE MOST PROBABLE cause.

What, you think someone could have planted demolition devices while the building was on fire? What do you think really happened?

 

[Galileo]

a grave situation

Thats impossible! everyone knows the WTC towers fell into their own footprints!

That's impossible! Everyone knows that gravity throws multi-ton steel beams upwards at 45 degree angles and horizontally 355 feet through the air!

 

[twinstead]

That's impossible! Everyone knows that gravity throws multi-ton steel beams upwards at 45 degree angles and horizontally 355 feet through the air!

Whew! Thank God the experts who have studied the collapse have you around to make learned observations like that.

I can see the world's structural engineering community slapping their hands against their head in one big collective "D'OH!".

 

[Galileo]

The following FACTS are from NIST Apx. L
[These facts are not going to change in the 'final' report]


There were fires on several floors, at different times, in the area of the initiating event.
[the failure of core column 79, 80 and/or 81]

Fires in east half of WTC 7

NIST:
11:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m.
Fire on floor 12, moved toward the east face
2:00 to 2:30 p.m.
Fires on east face, Floors 11 and 12 at the southeast corner

As of 2:30 p.m., there were fires on floors 11 and 12 in the area of the initiating event.

There is no evidence that the initiating event was caused by fire.

For fire to cause a core column to fail, 3 floors would have to collapse all around that column, and it would have to be uniformly heated to about 1,000 F.

There was no debris damage to or near the area of the initiating event.



That's the evidence.

Debris damage to the other end of the building,

and fires that a burned on a few floors, for a few hours, in the area where the collapse began.



Is anyone here willing to acknowledge that the evidence does not support the "DD/F caused the collapse" hypothesis?

Chris;

You have hit the nail on the head here. I went through the same evidence on another thread:

Dylan Avery - Earth-Shattering News Coming Soon (again)
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2891538#post2891538

[starting on page 6]

The evidence shows that the office fires did not cause WTC 7 collapse, nor cause WTC 7 to fall in a controlled demolition.

The JREF people are quite smug, and felt beforehand that a controlled demolition was a crazy idea. But the evidence shows that it was. The JREFers are now left to rabid speculation, the same type of speculation that they supposedly shun. But that's all they have, speculation.

The evidence says otherwise.

After looking at all the evidence, WTC 7 was a controlled demolition.

 

[twinstead]

After looking at all the evidence, WTC 7 was a controlled demolition.

You know, you can say that over and over and over again, but it changes nothing.

Tell me again what evidence of CD you have? You are speculating just as much as you are accusing us of. DO YOU HAVE ANY PHYSICAL EVIDENCE OF EXPLOSIVES, either being planted or going off, or any residue, or anything?

 

[Galileo]

You know, you can say that over and over and over again, but it changes nothing.

Tell me again what evidence of CD you have? You are speculating just as much as you are accusing us of. DO YOU HAVE ANY PHYSICAL EVIDENCE OF EXPLOSIVES, either being planted or going off, or any residue, or anything?

What physical evidence do you have that core columns in WTC 7 were heated from ofiice fires?

 

[Pardalis]

Why don't you guys wait for the final report?

 

[Galileo]

Why don't you guys wait for the final report?

I've been waiting for 6 years.

 

[Pardalis]

I've been waiting for 6 years.

Then you can wait a few months longer.

 

[NYCEMT86]

What physical evidence do you have that core columns in WTC 7 were heated from ofiice fires?

Galileo,

Are you seriously that ignorant?


Okay I am going to give you a homework assignment in 3 parts...

You must look up and describe to me what Heat Transfer is.

Than you must look up and describe to me what Thermal Layering is.

Than describe to me if a direct flame is needed to weaken the columns in the WTC 7 building.

 

[Norseman]

I've been waiting for 6 years.

What you and Christopher7 do not understand, is that a proper investigation contains far, far more than just looking at some videos and conclude that it was a CD.

In real investigations it can take several years to pinpoint the cause of the accident. And they have to look at all likely causes and chains of events that can explain the accident. And sometimes they are not even able to find the cause of the accident.

A example of this is Flight 585 that crashed in Colorado Springs in 1991. It took 10 years and one more accident (Flight 427) before a updated and final report from NTSB was adopted that pinpointed the cause. The first report was finished in 1992 with undetermined reason. The NTSB reports on Flight 585 and Flight 427 you will find here. In the case of Flight 427 NTSB used 5 years on the investigation before the report was finished.

Newspaper articles about the investigation:
The Seattle Times
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

And as you should know, after the June 2004 progress report on the WTC investigation was issued, the NIST investigation team stopped working on WTC 7 and was assigned full-time through the fall of 2005 to complete the investigation of the WTC towers. And they started their work in 2002.

 

[twinstead]

What physical evidence do you have that core columns in WTC 7 were heated from ofiice fires?

The best theory, the theory that the vast majority of experts on Earth believe makes the most sense, of how the building fell is is out there for all to see. Anybody on Earth can scrutinize the report.

The vast majority of eye witnesses support this theory. The vast majority of experts on the ground that day watching the building with their own eyes support this theory. Perhaps the report isn't perfect, but you with all your investigative experience must realize that nothing like this can be perfect. But the general consensus is that it fits the available evidence the best.

That is the 'official story'. You think it is wrong? You think there was a cover up? You think the NIST is lying? Pretty serious claims.

You think CD caused WTC to fall? Then the onus is on YOU to prove it. So far all you folks can do is try to desperately find an anomaly in the NIST report, ANY anomaly, and then try to shove your little fantasy down our throats as the default winning theory.

What you should be doing is finding evidence to support whatever theory you may have.

 

[Belz...]

That's impossible! Everyone knows that gravity throws multi-ton steel beams upwards at 45 degree angles and horizontally 355 feet through the air!

How is that surprising ?

Do you have any idea what you're talking about ? This isn't kindergarten, Gally. Please research the subject.

The evidence shows that the office fires did not cause WTC 7 collapse

Really ? Then you should call NIST and let them in on your astute conclusions.

nor cause WTC 7 to fall in a controlled demolition.

[...]

After looking at all the evidence, WTC 7 was a controlled demolition.

Er...

The JREF people are quite smug, and felt beforehand that a controlled demolition was a crazy idea. But the evidence shows that it was.

Really ?

That's quite odd, because 7 WTC's collapse looks and sounds nothing like a controlled demolition. The same goes for the twins. So why in the world would you think it's a CD ?

The JREFers are now left to rabid speculation, the same type of speculation that they supposedly shun. But that's all they have, speculation.

In the CTer's world, one man's evidence is another's fantasy, and one man's speculation is another's reality.

What physical evidence do you have that core columns in WTC 7 were heated from ofiice fires?

There were fires. There was steel. It's not like steel heats up in a fire only 14% of the time.

 

[jaydeehess]

If Jennings had to "hang on" to survive from falling in the stairwell, then we can say the stairwell was physically damaged due to the missile explosion.

gee MaGZ, you said a few posts before this one that all the missile did was cause fires to ignite, not structural damage. NOW, in the quoted post, you say that the lissile had enough power to physically damage a fire exit stairwell such as to make it impassable. -- not possible AFAIK--

 

[jaydeehess]

Wrong

We are not certain which stairwell it was.

The lack of evidence for DD/F is not evidence of CD.

I hasten to add that lack of evidence of CD is not evidence of CD

 

[jaydeehess]

quote me
you have this a2a missile hitting WTC 7, entering the building and damaging a steel and concrete structure.

quote MaGZ
I have never made any claims the missile contributed to the collapse of WTC 7. It started the fires in the building.

Note MaGZ that you mischaracterize what I said. I said that you have the missile damaging steel and concrete in the stairwell. I did not state that you have the missile being responsible for the collapse.

A recent History Cannel documentary on 9/11 has an individual stating the fires started in WTC 7 around 9:30 that morning. This was before the collapse of the Twin Towers.

Context? Was the person speaking in the Central time zone when they saw this on TV? Are they an hour out and simply mistaken? Certainly there is no record amoung the people responsible for addressing the fires occuring in NYC of fires in WTC 7 until after the tower collapses. Would that mean that the entire NYFD is in-on-it or cowed into silence about aspects contributing to the deaths of thousands?

Yes, it was an air to air missile.

Your opinion, based upon badly rendered youtube videos and some type of desire to slag the USAF or US gov't.

Posted by jaydeehess
I had thought that we had decided that they were in the east stairwell but recently Christopher 7 placed them in the west end.

west or east the structure took an extreme insult when the SW corner was gouged out a couple of dozen feet deep and for more than a dozen floors and photos that show the other multistorey gouge further east indicate another heavy shock to the structure, each of which would occur within a second or two at most. Such a shock could easily cause damage to non-proximate structural components including the stairwell supports. As I have pointed out, a bird (last one was a crow IIRC) hitting my front window shakes the entire house without breaking the window.

quote MaGZ
If I remember correctly Jennings and Hess tried to access a service elevator but was unable to do so. Then building security personnel showed them a stairwell. Perhaps the stairwell Jennings and Hess used was not the publically accessible stairwells. Perhaps it was a stairwell close to the service elevator.

If so then perhaps you'd like to show where this mysterious stairwell is on the building layouts in the NIST docuement. No sense in speculating on the existance of a stairwell without any evidence whatsoever (none, zip, nada, zero) of such a beast.

Posted by jaydeehess
There were people in the lobby of WTC 7 when WTC 2 came down. Their statements say that the glass in the lobby shattered (one man describes having it embedded in his back as they exit through a door to the loading dock) and thick choking dust came in through the broken windows. they do not mention the building being rocked by any explosions prior to the collapse of WTC 2.

yet according the interpretation of Jennings statements WTC 2 was still standing when he got to the 6th floor. Does he ever mention WTC 2 coming down? WTC 1? Surely he and Hess did not simply go back and wait in the hall for 1 1/2 hours nor notice when the two towers did fall. In any case it is quite obvious that the towers were NOT standing when they were rescued and that the destroyed lobby was then not neccessarily the result of any explosion that no one else noticed occurring before either tower collapsed .

quote MaGZ
It is interesting to note that the individual had to exit the building from the loading dock and not the lobby. Before the collapse of WTC 2 the lobby of WTC 7 was being used as a triage to help the injured from the missile explosion that occurred at 9:03.

No, the lobby was being used for triage of victims of the WTC 2 collapse.
Jennings and Hess were in the building for over an hour and a half MaGZ and exited AFTER both towers had collapsed.
No matter how you arrange the timeline to suit your pet contentions, even if J&H were at the OEM at 9am they were out of the building sometime after 10:30am

Posted by jaydeehess
,,,, but no one noticed an explosion that damaged the east stairwell. Do you suppose that Catalano and the others all left WTC 7, the explosion occured, and then they all came back to WTC 7, and then WTC 2 collapsed?
Catalano says they felt WTC 7 shake when WTC 1 got hit. Do you not suppose they would have felt an explosion strong enough to cause structural damage occuring within the building as well?

quote MaGZ
NDBoston, a forum member here and one who evacuated WTC 7 that day, said he felt debris hit WTC 7 when the second plane hit WTC 2. What NDBoston really felt was the missile hitting WTC 7 a few seconds after the plane hit WTC 2.

Gee, or he felt the debris of WTC 2 hitting the building a few seconds after that debris exited WTC 2, or considering the way you maul timelines, he was saying he felt the debris hit WTC 7 when WTC 2 fell. You did not provide a quote from NDBoston nor a link to his post so I take what you state about him with a bucketload of salt. At any rate you have nothing, absolutly nothing, to back this claim other than your own twisted opinion.

Posted by jaydeehess
If he was in the building for 1 1/2 hours before reaching the lobby AND he had arrived at the OEM after it had been ordered evacuated at 9:44 then he was in that lobby well after ( after 11 am) both towers had collapsed.

quote MaGZ

Jennings arrived at OEM just before the crash of the second plane into WTC 2. He found the offices had just been evacuate with hot coffee still smoking on the desks. Those at OEM knew another plane was heading to NYC but did not know which building it was destined to hit. Jennings made a few calls and was told the get out immediately. Jennings experienced the missile explosion later in a stairwell. After the return of the people on the 23rd floor, the OEM was officially evacuated at 9:44 (before either Tower had collapsed) because of the fires that were started by the missile explosion.

According to all involved, the OEM was manned until the evacuation at 9:44. You see a constant need to rewrite the timelines in order to create a senario that backs your contention. Not suprising given your invention of a new stairwell in WTC 7 as well.

Posted by jaydeehess

It is possible that the 'explosion' they experienced then is the collapse of WTC 2, not WTC 1.
He says the stairwell was impassable and damaged by the explosion, or at least he says the landing 'gave out'.

quote MaGZ
You are saying the collapse of WTC 2 damaged the internal structured of WTC 7. No one believes this.

I am not even sure the stairwell was physically damaged. If it was then it occured as a result of one of the tower's collapses, perhaps even WTC 2's.. I do believe that the stairs were unusable.

Posted by jaydeehess
Odd that you would put it that way.

In fact Catelano states that he was in a room with no windows. He and the guys he was with felt the shaking and heard the sound and ran to where they could look outside. There, within minutes of this shaking and sound, they saw the WTC 1 on fire. So IF Jennings and Hess felt the same thing then you are going to have to explain how it was that they were at a recently abandoned OEM BEFORE any plane hit anything.
So, do you think about what you are going to put forth before going public with it?

quote MaGZ
So are you now saying Jennings and Hess were in WTC 7 when the first plane hit?

you seem to have a reading comprehension problem.
Galelao (SP) stated that Jennings and Hess felt the same thing that Catelano did. I asked him to explain why Jennings and Hess were in the stairwell before anything nasty had occured in Manhattan that morning.
I don't buy that at all.

"Most people in WTC 1 were in the stairwells when WTC 2 collapsed..." (re: jds quote)this is not true.

Most people had evacuated WTC 1 when WTC 2 came down. The firefightes had them to evacuate WTC 1 via WTC 3: the Marriot Hotel. Mostly firefighters remained in the stairwells of WTC 1 when WTC 2 fell. Take a look at the Naudet video and you will see that before the collapse of WTC 2 most people had evacuate WTC 1 at the upper concourse lever. The crowds of people were thinner in WTC 1 when WTC 2 came down.

keee-riest your reading comprehension says something about your grade school education!
OK, to spell it out in intricate detail then, MaGZ.
Most people still within WTC 1 at the time of the collapse of WTC 2 were in the stairwells , including all fire, police.

MY POINT was (IIRC given the inanity of your response) that people in the stairwells did not witness the collapse of WTC 2 visually.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

We've covered that, but i will go over it again if you will acknowledge that the facts listed in post 3335 show that there is NO evidence to support the official hypothesis, or offer evidence to the contrary.

I can't acknowledge something that isn't true, just as you will ignore things that clearly are true. How about listing the post # that shows the huge gash shown on video is not really a huge gash? I suppose it's eyewitness testimony saying there was no damage that cna be seen by anyone looking at the video/pictures?

 

[jaydeehess]

What physical evidence do you have that core columns in WTC 7 were heated from ofiice fires?

The indisputable fact of fires in the building. Several fires, on several floors , each of which would be considered major fires in and of themselves on any other day.

That may not be enough for you, however I would I assume you adhere to a speculation about planted explosives that has even less evidence of being true. Thus any reluctance on your part to accept the fires as evidence of fire induced collapse is somewhat odd at best, and pure hypocrisy at the other end of the spectrum.

 

[jaydeehess]

Originally Posted by MaGZ
NDBoston,

If you look back on it all, I think you will say the impact of the second plane into WTC 2 seemed more forceful to you than the impact of the first plane into WTC 1.

Given that the second impact occured lower down and at a higher velocity than the first imapct , your speculation on that minute detail may well be correct.

 

[phunk]

That's impossible! Everyone knows that gravity throws multi-ton steel beams upwards at 45 degree angles and horizontally 355 feet through the air!

I for one would like to see a video or some proof of a beam being thrown upwards.