10 story hole in WTC 7

[tsig]

Excellent find.
Evidence, presented in a straightforward manner, is always appropriate and appreciated.

Are there any examples from 911 that exhibit this refraction characteristic?

NIST says the fires on the west face had burned out when the picture was taken.
The breeze was blowing the smoke [hot gases] to the south east.

Just looking at pictures.

 

[Christopher7]

Chris, this is utterly, utterly ridiculous. You're suggesting that the laws of physical optics may have been different on 9-11 to what they are known to be at all other times and places, and that for some reason the refraction of light due to random density variations in unevenly heated air may not have occurred just on that day, at that time. You're standing on a rooftop shouting out your ignorance for the world to hear. Really, it's quite embarrassing to watch.

Dave

I'm saying that looking thru a gas flame up close at details is not comparable with the photo in question.
The refraction effect was minimal when looking thru a flame.
There are no examples of this phenomenon in any of the photographs from 911.
The fires had gone out on the west side and the hot gases were being blown to the south west.
This is very clever but it cannot account for the missing window and wall in the NIST photo, nor can it account for the stretched out windows and the curved wall.
Walls do not curve. The granite cladding would have broken off if the wall were pushed inward.
The Zafar photo shows the wall and granite cladding around the windows on 14 and 15 are intact.

 

[Belz...]

Walls do not curve.

These do.

 

[Christopher7]

These do.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_608045892c4f64e35.jpg

Good find.
The bowing out occurs over about 30 feet.
This is quite different from a wall bending in over a few feet.
WTC 7 had a stone facade that would have broken and fallen off if the wall was bent in.

 

[Norseman]

The fires had gone out on the west side and the hot gases were being blown to the south west.

You should be very careful with that claim Christopher. The wind gave the impression that the fires had gone out on the West side. But as you can see in this video, when the wind lost strength for a moment smoke poured out of the windows on the West side. But when the wind blew stronger, it went in through the broken windows on the West side and blew the smoke out of the broken windows on the South side.

And if you look at figure 5-15 in the FEMA report on WTC 7 the photo gives the impression that fires had burned out on the West side. But when you look at figure L-22a in the NIST interim report on WTC 7 and the Aman Zafar photo, both photos taken later in the day, you will notice an increase in the number of broken and burned out windows. And also a lot more smoke coming out of the windows in the Zafar photo. So evidently the fires continued burn and spread on the West side of the building throughout the day.

 

[funk de fino]

I like the bit where someone says "look at the hole in that building....its gonna come down"

I wonder why he thought that?

I wonder if he seen them planting the "silent" explosives C7 cannot find any examples of?

 

[twinstead]

I like the bit where someone says "look at the hole in that building....its gonna come down"

I wonder why he thought that?

I wonder if he seen them planting the "silent" explosives C7 cannot find any examples of?

Yup. Don't you know "it's gunna come down" is code for "I know the building was rigged with explosives"?

 

[Norseman]

I'm saying that looking thru a gas flame up close at details is not comparable with the photo in question.
The refraction effect was minimal when looking thru a flame.
There are no examples of this phenomenon in any of the photographs from 911.

In addition to the NYPD photo you can take a look at this photo on Flickr. The photo is taken at noon at a moment when the wind allowed hot smoke and air to move a bit North.

In the photo it looks like the top part of the Verizon building is tipping over. Also note how all the details of the building is smeared out and how some of the windows have take on twisted shapes, in this regard look at the small building structure at the foot of the upper part on the North side. That building part should look more like it those in this photo, even though all details of the Verizon building is smeared out in this photo also, due to hot air and smoke swirling around the building.

When looking at du first photo again, notice how the buildings behind the Verizon building appears through the heat shimmer from the fires at Ground Zero, while the top of WTC 7 looks quiet sharp. And also take a look at the buildings in the upper left corner, there are some lines there that should have been straight.

Photographed from a different angle and distance about 20 seconds later the Verizon building looks like it should, but take look at the lower NW corner and North wall of the Verzion building, those it look straight to you?

Finely take a look at this photo to. Notice how the buildings in the upper left corner have a stretched appearance.

And I find it very likely that the NIST photo is from the same series as the pictures that I have linked here, taken by Olympus C-2100 UZ with only 2 MP.

 

[Norseman]

Finally it is time to address the mistakes you did in the interpretation of the above photos Christopher7.

In the NIST photo, the west side is pushed in.

No, the west side only appears to to be pushed in. If you look at the NYPD photo (figure L-22a) in the NIST interim report on WTC 7 you can see a gray haze of smoke raising from the foot of WTC 7 up towards the SW corner window in area of floor 21. This is where the line of the SW corner starts to curve in. Because of this smoke there is a layer of hoter air between WTC 7 and the Verizon building, this causes the light to change direction going from the hot layer to the colder layer above, crating the effect of the lower part of WTC 7 being pushed in. This effect is enhanced by the fact that the corner plates on floor 17 and down are gone. Photographed from other angels this effect is not noticeable. Therefore we can be pretty sure that the west side of WTC 7 was not pushed in. While the stretching of the windows in the upper right hand corner of the photo, could just as well be due to design compromises in the construction of the camera lens and sensor.

The corner is gone and what's left of the window on 14 is heavily damaged

Yes, that is a correct statement. This is evident in all the photos including the photo in figure 5-15 in the FEMA report on WTC 7. The corner plates are gone together with corner column. And all the photos show the same details regarding the damage to the corner area.

Here's another comparison:
The NIST photo has been rotated [using software] to where we are looking straight at it, and waddya know, the windows are the right size now.
Kinda makesya think thats the way it was in the first place.

What your software did was to correct for some distortions likely introduced by the camera. But this you did at the price of messing up the picture more than ever. Perspective is totally changed, the window frames now look ragged and uneven, items that in the original photo appeared be down on floor or below the window sill now appears in the middle of the window, or seems to be a part of the lower window frame, and the roof of the Verizon building looks like it is a part of the bellow of an accordion. And the frames of the corner windows from floor 17 and down looks like they are curved around the corner. You only managed to make the damage look a lot worse than it really is. You know, you can not use software to get out of focus pictures sharp, or correct for air refraction's in one part of the picture. You can use software to correct for uniform lens flaws in a picture, like curved building lines in a picture taken by a wide angel lens.

Note that the whole corner is gone.
In the Zafar photo There's something there.

Yes, but not in the way you imply. The corner plates on both the west side and south side of the SW coner are gone, together with the corner column from below floor 18 and down. This fact is very evident when we look at the right hand close up crop that you posted above. But it is only the right hand frame in the corner windows, on the west side, that is gone. Even in your wildly distorted version of the NYPD photo the corner windows are clearly visible. Below floor 14 the corner windows are hidden by smoke in the NYPD photo.

Of course there is something there when we look at the Zafar photo, because that photo is taken from an angle where we are able to see the south side of WTC 7. While we in the NYPD photo, that is shot from an angle where we can not see the south side of WTC 7, we are looking straight through the spots where the corner plates and the corner column should have been on floor 17 and 16. What we in fact are looking at in the Zafar photo is the edge of the wall on the south side of WTC 7. Again this fact is very evident when we look at the close up crop that you posted, and even more evident when you compare the close up crop with the drawing in figure 5-11 in the FEMA report.

The red arrow from your close up crop is pointing at the wrong place in your distorted version of the NYPD photo, because it points at an object that appears to hang outside the second window frame from the SW corner. While the object it should point at, is inside the corner window to the right of where the arrow now points in your photo.

The only claims, regarding structural damage, that NIST have made based upon the NYPD photo are that the SW corner is damaged from floor 18 and down to floor 8. And that the NYPD photo indicates that a least two exterior columns were severed. That the corner column is severed is very evident from the photos above. While I also find it likely, judging from the NYPD photo and the other photos, that at least one of the two columns next to the SW corner on the west side could have been damaged or severed. In fact I find the claims NIST makes very reasonable, given the available information we have. And keep in mind Christopher7, the damage to the SW corner is ruled out as causing the initiating event in the collapse hypothesis that NIST discusses in the interim report:

If the initiating event was due to damage to the perimeter moment frame, then it would have started along the south or southwest facade

The only ones who have presented versions of the NYPD photo with the appearance of exaggerated damage is you and your fellow CT'ers.

The fact is that the NYPD photo, as presented in the NIST interim report, is completely consistent with all other available photos of the SW corner of WTC 7.

 

[Christopher7]

You should be very careful with that claim Christopher. The wind gave the impression that the fires had gone out on the West side. But as you can see in this video, when the wind lost strength for a moment smoke poured out of the windows on the West side. But when the wind blew stronger, it went in through the broken windows on the West side and blew the smoke out of the broken windows on the South side.

It's not my claim.
NIST Apx. L pg 24 [28 on pg counter]
Before 2:00 p.m.
• Figures L–22a shows fires that had burned out by early afternoon on Floors 19, 21, 22, 29, and 30 along the west face near the southwest corner.

Astute observation. If the wind was blowing thru the windows on the west side and blowing the smoke [hot gases] out the south side, when the NIST photo was taken, then there would be no distortion due to refraction.

And if you look at figure 5-15 in the FEMA report on WTC 7 the photo gives the impression that fires had burned out on the West side. But when you look at figure L-22a in the NIST interim report on WTC 7 and the Aman Zafar photo, both photos taken later in the day,

The FEMA photo 5-15 was taken about 2:00 p.m.
The shadow of the Verizon building is just past the north wall of WTC 7.

The NIST photo was also taken about 2:00 p.m.

The shadow of WFC 2 on Winter Garden puts the time of the Zafar photo at about 4:30 p.m.*

you will notice an increase in the number of broken and burned out windows.

No, the FEMA photo doesn't show anything above the 9th floor.
The Zafar photo doesn't show any broken windows, just smoke on floors 17, 18 and 22.

And also a lot more smoke coming out of the windows in the Zafar photo. So evidently the fires continued burn and spread on the West side of the building throughout the day.

The Zafar photo only shows the first 2 windows on the west side so we can't tell if the fires spread on the west side.

* GlenB, you were right about using the bottom of WFC 2 as the proper point to determine the shadow. The aerial photo is centered on the WTC plaza so the top of WFC 2 is to the left of vertical.
Correction made, thank you.

 

[GT/CS]

Chris, I'm pretty sure you still have your directions skewed. Please post the aerial with North at the top and South at the bottom.

 

[Zlaya]

How many times do you have to be told that the final report on WTC7 is not yet complete, Christopher? What part of that do you not understand?

You do know, don't you, that they are currently working on said final report and that they hope to publish it this spring, right? You can tilt at windmills all you like in the interim but if your posts here to date are any indication of your (lack of) rational, logical and critical thinking skills, well, let's just say that I won't be holding my breath waiting to hear anything intelligent from you in the future.

It was due in September of this year. What is taking so long? I mean Bin Ladin was proven to be guilty 10 minutes into the event, and we had the list of 19 hijackers the next day.

Why is the report into what brought down WTC 7 taking so long in comparison?

 

[GlennB]

* GlenB, you were right about using the bottom of WFC 2 as the proper point to determine the shadow. The aerial photo is centered on the WTC plaza so the top of WFC 2 is to the left of vertical.
Correction made, thank you.

Very decent of you to say so.

In retrospect, my point was in fact rather minor in the grand scheme of things, and made much too aggressively. My apologies. Spending too much time debating Terral can make folk a little tetchy....

 

[Norseman]

It's not my claim.
NIST Apx. L pg 24 [28 on pg counter]
Before 2:00 p.m.
• Figures L–22a shows fires that had burned out by early afternoon on Floors 19, 21, 22, 29, and 30 along the west face near the southwest corner.

The FEMA photo 5-15 was taken about 2:00 p.m.
The shadow of the Verizon building is just past the north wall of WTC 7.

The NIST photo was also taken about 2:00 p.m.

The shadow of WFC 2 on Winter Garden puts the time of the Zafar photo at about 4:30 p.m.*

No, the FEMA photo doesn't show anything above the 9th floor.
The Zafar photo doesn't show any broken windows, just smoke on floors 17, 18 and 22.

Sorry, I meant figure 5-16 in the FEMA report just below figure 5-15. It appears to have been taken before noon. This photo gives the impression that the fires have burned out on the west side. Notice the corner window and its closest neighbor on floor 22, where only the right half of the corner window appears to have be broken. Also note seven broken and blackened window frames on floor 29 and 30. And there is no or very little smoke coming from the the windows on floor 17 and 18.

In the NYPD photo (figure L-22a in the NIST interim report), that you estimates to have been taken at 2:00 pm, the two windows on floor 22 now both appears completely broken and blackened. While the seven broken and blackened windows on floor 29 and 30 now have become eight. And there appears to be some smoke from the windows on floor 17 and 18.

And finally in the Zafar photo, that you estimates to have been taken at 4:30 PM, a lot of black smoke appears to come out of the two window frames at the corner on floor 22. And from windows on floor 17 and 18.

What this shows, is that the appearance of the NYPD photo likely have led NIST to underestimate the level of fire on the west side in the interim report. This is not exactly like NIST exaggerating the level of fire and damage in its interim report. Generally I find the NIST report to be very conservative and careful in its estimates of the damage and the fires in WTC 7, quiet contrary to what you have tried to imply in this thread Christopher7.

And by the way, figure 5-15 in the FEMA report and figure L-22b in the NIST interim report shows smoldering inside the rubble between WTC7 and the Verizon building, with shimmering hot air and some smoke raising up between the buildings.

 

[Norseman]

Good point Belz, I have been considering this for some time, even though I do not think that the NYPD photo shows the effect of sagging floors pulling the exterior walls in, like they did in WTC 1 and WTC 2 as the photo above shows.

Given the fact that WTC 7 was a tube in tube design like WTC 1 and WTC 2 it seems likely that this could have developed in parts of the building during the day. But none of the available photos show this effect. The most likely place would have been the south side with the heaviest fires, but that part of the building was obscured in smoke, so we do not now.

If this developed in parts of the building during the day, it certainly would not have be good for the stability of WTC 7.

Judging from photographs of the rubble heap of the collapsed WTC 7 building, it seems very likely that the exterior walls could tolerate some bending without the granite panels breaking and falling off, as Chiristopher7 claimed they would.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then, considering the fact that this thread is beyond ridiculously long, it really, really is time to let it end, while we all wait for the NIST draft report for public comment due at the end of the year. And if Christopher7 is not happy with the conclusions in the final report he can start a new thread. Or even better write a public comment to NIST explaining what he is unhappy with, if anything. Personally, I find the NIST interim report very reasonable indeed so far.

 

[GT/CS]

It was due in September of this year. What is taking so long? I mean Bin Ladin was proven to be guilty 10 minutes into the event, and we had the list of 19 hijackers the next day.

Why is the report into what brought down WTC 7 taking so long in comparison?

If they produced it quickly would you not then be whining about them not doing a thorough job and rushing out an incomplete product?

 

[firecoins]

World Trade Center # 7 never collpased. Its still there today. There is a CT saying 7 collapsed. The video of collapse is just a holligram to throw you off the real ct, that aliens were behind 9/11.

 

[RedIbis]

we had the list of 19 hijackers the next day.

Brief correction. We had the list of 19 hijackers atabout 11am on 9/11. Fast work, huh?


Robert Bonner, the head of Customs and Border Protection, later testifies, "We ran passenger manifests through the system used by Customs—two were hits on our watch list of August 2001." (This is presumably a reference to hijackers Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi, watch-listed on August 23, 2001.) "And by looking at the Arab names and their seat locations, ticket purchases and other passenger information, it didn't take a lot to do a rudimentary link analysis. Customs officers were able to ID 19 probable hijackers within 45 minutes. I saw the sheet by 11 a.m. And that analysis did indeed correctly identify the terrorists." [New York Observer, 2/11/2004]

 

[Christopher7]

Very decent of you to say so.

In retrospect, my point was in fact rather minor in the grand scheme of things, and made much too aggressively. My apologies. Spending too much time debating Terral can make folk a little tetchy....

No worries mate.

I appreciate the correction.

Chris

 

[Christopher7]

Sorry, I meant figure 5-16 in the FEMA report just below figure 5-15. It appears to have been taken before noon.

I would put the time at about 1:00 p.m.
Note the sunlight on the fence rail at the corner of the promenade [3rd floor exterior plaza] on the left, and on the WTC 1 framework section leaning up against the promenade.
That puts the sun a little east of due south.
12:00 [1:00 p.m. EDT] sun azimuth 183.3

This photo gives the impression that the fires have burned out on the west side. Notice the corner window and its closest neighbor on floor 22, where only the right half of the corner window appears to have be broken.

The fire has just started and has busted one window pane. [note the smoke]

Also note seven broken and blackened window frames on floor 29 and 30. And there is no or very little smoke coming from the the windows on floor 17 and 18.

In the NYPD photo (figure L-22a in the NIST interim report), that you estimates to have been taken at 2:00 pm, the two windows on floor 22 now both appears completely broken and blackened. While the seven broken and blackened windows on floor 29 and 30 now have become eight. And there appears to be some smoke from the windows on floor 17 and 18.

Right, the NIST photo was taken some time after the FEMA photo.

And finally in the Zafar photo, that you estimates to have been taken at 4:30 PM, a lot of black smoke appears to come out of the two window frames at the corner on floor 22. And from windows on floor 17 and 18.

And therein lies the rub.
NIST figure L-22a shows the fire on floor 22 had burned out.

If the wind was strong enough to blow the smoke out the south facing windows, as you suggested.
That would eliminate refraction as a factor.

If the fire is burned out on floor 22 then the WTC 7 part of the NIST Photo was taken after the Zafar photo.