RFC: Bazant and Zhou Simple Analysis refuted

Norseman said:
Here is a close up of the column that I posted before. Below it is a photo from NIST NCSTAR 1-3C Figure 3-24 for comparison.

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/18141478fca18017ed.jpg[/qimg]


[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/18141478fca377bd53.jpg[/qimg]

The black edges is a tell tale sign that the cut was made after the column was recovered from the WTC pile. Otherwise it should have been rusted like the broken weld joints at the end and like the area around the cut that is missing paint. But there are some rust visible down in the left hand corner of the cut closest to the camera, indicating that the object that made the dent when the tower collapsed also cracked/ punctured the steel as you proposed. Whatever, the engineers surly removed a piece for metallurgical analyzes because of the dent. We would need a closer and sharper photo to say anything sure about striating. Anyhow parts of the NIST cut was pretty smooth.

Here are some photos of artistic cuts in WTC steel stored at Hangar 17 at the Kennedy International Airport: Photo number 16, including the next photos and the previous photos.. Note that the edges have rusted again in these old cuts and that they are quite smooth.

And finally a picture of recyclers cutting up WTC steel at a recycling site:
http://www.americanrecycler.com/11wtc.html
Note the blackened edges of the cut.
Click to expand...

Initially I thought you were refering to the large dark area around the hole, not just the edge of the hole itself. If the dark around the edge of the hole isn't just a shadow I'd side with you and agree that most likely a coupon was taken. It would be an ideal spot for a sample to determine the amount of force sustained. I guess my point is no matter which way I look at it there is no possible way for an explosive charge to make that hole as it obviously sustained a great deal of force in several directions, apparent from the jagged edge. Plus the explosive force required to puncture such a small hole is staggering.
 
Heiwa said:
Yes, it is a very small fire in WTC1 - spread out in many separate locations and not very concentrated anywhere. No big deal.
Click to expand...
The juxtaposition of the above comment and the second photo in this post leads me ask: would that qualify as a Stundie?

It also suggests to me that Heiwa is seriously divorced from reality.
 
Heiwa said:
Yes, it is a very small fire in WTC1 - spread out in many separate locations and not very concentrated anywhere. No big deal. The WTC 1 fire zone structure, several floors 4000 m² large with very solid supporting columns, is much too strong to suddenly collapse.

It is basic. Read http://heiwaco.tripod.com/nist.htm again.
Click to expand...



Why do you keep linking to a worthless paper? You are demonstrably incompetent to write a paper on the collapses of the Twin Towers.
 
Heiwa said:
Yes, it is a very small fire in WTC1 - spread out in many separate locations and not very concentrated anywhere. No big deal. The WTC 1 fire zone structure, several floors 4000 m² large with very solid supporting columns, is much too strong to suddenly collapse.

It is basic. Read http://heiwaco.tripod.com/nist.htm again.
Click to expand...
His web site is as challenged as his ability to see the biggest office fire in the shortest time ever set in a large high rise, as a fire?~! Dumb post! From 9/11 truth member.

If this is not the biggest reason to doubt 9/11 truth, one has to be...
 
Once again, can anyone show me a few photos of recovered buckled core columns from the collapse initiation zones?

Why do you think that you can't find some representative samples of core columns from that area? There should be close to 100 of them. They are about 38 feet long. Hard to miss.

Sceptics?

Show me a few.


Where did they all go?


Buckling? Can you show me a few?
 
Is this a buckled column? What could have happened to it's end?

1391NY001_z1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Here you got two videos of a world record within the controlled demolition industry, Major Tom:
Records: At 439 ft. tall Hudson’s is the tallest building & the tallest structural steel building ever imploded. At 2.2 million square feet, Hudson's is the largest single building ever imploded.
Click to expand...
Source

Close up


From far away


What sound is missing from these two videos of the WTC 1 and 2 collapses:

WTC 1:


WTC 2:


The missing sound of detonations in the last two videos is the big show stopper for your idea of a controlled demolition of the WTC towers, Major Tom. There is no way you can get around that fact. All the videos and all the photos on your website tell us that there were no bombs. Just aircraft impact - fire - weakening - collapse and nothing else. In understand very well that it is hard to face up to this this fact in view of the effort you have put into this. You managed to debunk Steven Jones with the materiel you gathered. So way not make the logical conclusion that there was no inside job and no bombs. Your site is a great resource with some adjustments, that is the positive part of your effort.
 
Major_Tom said:
Is this a buckled column? What could have happened to it's end?

[qimg]http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911_old/Photo%20archives/bomb%20marks/1391NY001_z1.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

It broke off in the collapse. The welds holding the plates together were ruptured when it broke. The collapsing inside of those towers were a tremendous chaos of falling debris, that is an understatement, things got crushed, bumped, twisted, flattened etc. Who nows what happened to that column on its way down.
 
I think the ultimate refutation of the Bazant paper is the inability of anyone to find sets of buckled columns from the collapse initiation zones.

I can come up with many other arguments but the lack of "heat affected" core buckled columns is simple and none of you can debunk that.

There is no need to model the collapse, just the collapse initiation.


Collapse initation has always been the biggest mystery.


Once collapse is initiated, I personally don't give a hoot if collapse continues or is arrested.


So if yourselves or NIST cannot explain collapse initiation by showing the the failed core column sections from that zone, then you have pretty much been debunked, no?


Mangled objects in the rubble and chaos won't pass as an excuse for not finding them.

Core columns within the rubble are remarkably well preserved and the damage patterns contain all the information we need to understand what initiated collapse.


So in this thread not much more info will be needed to debunk the Bazant model except for what Gregory requires.



Your move. Please produce some representative damaged core columns from the collapse initiation zones or simply admit that you can't.


I'll be pestering you until you do.
 
Major_Tom said:
Once again, can anyone show me a few photos of recovered buckled core columns from the collapse initiation zones?

Why do you think that you can't find some representative samples of core columns from that area? There should be close to 100 of them. They are about 38 feet long. Hard to miss.

Sceptics?

Show me a few.


Where did they all go?


Buckling? Can you show me a few?
Click to expand...

Like this one:
1814147911cfef3c41.jpg


NIST NCSTAR 1-3C. Figure 4-5. It is column 605A, floor 98-101. Se also paragraph 4.1.2 for NIST's take on the damage.
 
Just a question for you fellows talking with MT. Does he pay attention to anything you post? It doesn't appear that way. In the real world, dealing with someone who won't acknowledge others' points is, of course, very difficult. Even if he weren't, fundamentally, playing "where's Waldo?", this behavior, this refusal to engage, would remove the point to the conversation.
 
Sitting in a parking lot? Bent in the middle with ripped off ends? No reason I shouldn't trust that.

Representative samples?

I think the ultimate refutation of the Bazant paper is the inability of anyone to find sets of buckled columns from the collapse initiation zones.

I can come up with many other arguments but the lack of "heat affected" core buckled columns is simple and none of you can debunk that.

There is no need to model the collapse, just the collapse initiation.


Collapse initation has always been the biggest mystery.


Once collapse is initiated, I personally don't give a hoot if collapse continues or is arrested.


So if yourselves or NIST cannot explain collapse initiation by showing the the failed core column sections from that zone, then you have pretty much been debunked, no?


Mangled objects in the rubble and chaos won't pass as an excuse for not finding them.

Core columns within the rubble are remarkably well preserved and the damage patterns contain all the information we need to understand what initiated collapse.


So in this thread not much more info will be needed to debunk the Bazant model except for what Gregory requires.



Your move. Please produce some representative damaged core columns from the collapse initiation zones or simply admit that you can't.


I'll be pestering you until you do.
 
Norseman said:
Like this one:
1814147911cfef3c41.jpg


NIST NCSTAR 1-3C. Figure 4-5. It is column 605A, floor 98-101. Se also paragraph 4.1.2 for NIST's take on the damage.
Click to expand...

You did it!
Major_Tom said:
Once again, can anyone show me a few photos of recovered buckled core columns from the collapse initiation zones?
Why do you think that you can't find some representative samples of core columns from that area? There should be close to 100 of them. They are about 38 feet long. Hard to miss.
Sceptics?
Show me a few.
Where did they all go?
Buckling? Can you show me a few?
Click to expand...
Now he will pick up the goal posts and move them again! Sad fellow with the radio controlled bombs. Silent radio controlled bombs, going off without blast effects in his very photos.
 
Last edited:
Major_Tom said:
Sitting in a parking lot? Bent in the middle with ripped off ends? No reason I shouldn't trust that.

Representative samples?

I think the ultimate refutation of the Bazant paper is the inability of anyone to find sets of buckled columns from the collapse initiation zones.

I can come up with many other arguments but the lack of "heat affected" core buckled columns is simple and none of you can debunk that.

There is no need to model the collapse, just the collapse initiation.


Collapse initation has always been the biggest mystery.


Once collapse is initiated, I personally don't give a hoot if collapse continues or is arrested.


So if yourselves or NIST cannot explain collapse initiation by showing the the failed core column sections from that zone, then you have pretty much been debunked, no?


Mangled objects in the rubble and chaos won't pass as an excuse for not finding them.

Core columns within the rubble are remarkably well preserved and the damage patterns contain all the information we need to understand what initiated collapse.


So in this thread not much more info will be needed to debunk the Bazant model except for what Gregory requires.



Your move. Please produce some representative damaged core columns from the collapse initiation zones or simply admit that you can't.


I'll be pestering you until you do.
Click to expand...
No it's still your move, You've been asked a number of times and refuse to address this glaring problem with your hypothesis.

WHY ARE THERE NO SOUNDS OF EXPLOSIVES?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom