• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Failure mode in WTC towers

bofors said:
Exactly, we have every reason to suspect that the magically disappearing building-top pushing the fire-induced gravity driven collapse would tightly focus its air pressure in a very small number of locations midway down the tower. It's not like the air pressure is higher at the bottom of the tower or something. Someone just happened to leave windows open at these locations, just like people did after they jumped out of the buildings.

The facts that these so-called "squibs" shift periodically, appear in structural significant locations like near the absolute lateral center of the towers and are otherwise consistent with CD are meaningless. We know these facts are meaningless because we know these are fire-induced gravity collapses, any evidence to the contrary is merely coincidental.



Thank God! We have a rocket scientist to save us. Hurrah!!!
Click to expand...

Someone left the windows open in a building with sealed windows.

How interesting.

MM
 
Major_Tom said:
The intactness of the visible perimeter columns and ESPECIALLY THE TRAJECTORY of these columns means that they are not in freefall. They are being pushed outwards by the intact and unbuckled perimeter columns on which they are resting.


They are clearly being pushed out by something that is hidden within the dust.
Click to expand...

Which is it? Push out by "perimeter columns on which they are resting" or "something that is hidden within the dust"? Both?

Regarding the perimeter columns, here is what I think the critical questions are:

(1) How were the perimeter columns detached from the floors?

(2) How were the faces of perimeter columns detached from the corners of towers?

Once these questions are answered then we should know the mechanism which resulting in the large sheets of perimeter columns simple peeling off of the towers.
 
Last edited:
Norseman, anyone,

wtc-small.1059.jpg

wtc-small.1060.jpg

wtc-small.1061.jpg



I can't seem to download the above images from

http://www.reservoir.com/extra/wtc/


These are the best images. I agree it is a perimeter column but I want to zoom in as much as the resolution will allow and repost the magnified cropped image. It is falling so far below and so much quicker than any other rubble that it is of special interest.
It also can help give us a totally new perspective as to what a trajectory of a freefalling heavy body looks like.

This is how fast a freefalling heavy body actually falls to the ground.

Any help would be appreciated.
 
Major_Tom said:
It also can help give us a totally new perspective as to what a trajectory of a freefalling heavy body looks like.

This is how fast a freefalling heavy body actually falls to the ground.

Any help would be appreciated.
Click to expand...

It's called a parabola. Welcome to the 17th century.
 
bofors said:
Regarding the perimeter columns, here is what I think the critical questions are:

(1) How where the perimeter columns detached from the floors?

(2) How where the faces of perimeter columns detached from the corners of towers?
Click to expand...

Wait. Do you want to know "how" the perimeter columns were detached, or "where" they were detached? Or both?
 
Major_Tom said:
Norseman, anyone,

[qimg]http://www.reservoir.com/extra/wtc/wtc-small.1059.jpg[/qimg]
[qimg]http://www.reservoir.com/extra/wtc/wtc-small.1060.jpg[/qimg]
[qimg]http://www.reservoir.com/extra/wtc/wtc-small.1061.jpg[/qimg]


I can't seem to download the above images from

http://www.reservoir.com/extra/wtc/


These are the best images. I agree it is a perimeter column but I want to zoom in as much as the resolution will allow and repost the magnified cropped image. It is falling so far below and so much quicker than any other rubble that it is of special interest.
It also can help give us a totally new perspective as to what a trajectory of a freefalling heavy body looks like.

This is how fast a freefalling heavy body actually falls to the ground.

Any help would be appreciated.
Click to expand...
Maybe it was "pushed" so to speak by the collapsing floors. Is that too boring for you? Maybe the silent explosive rockets put it there, That's more fun ,huh?
 
Which is it? Push out by "perimeter columns on which they are resting" or "something that is hidden within the dust"? Both?
Click to expand...

The trajectories of the large visible portions of sheets are absolutely impossible if the object is in freefall.

The true trajectory is consistent with the visible portion being only the top of a much larger interconnected sheet. This sheet is NOT IN FREEFALL.

The bottom is firmly supported because the sheet is not actually separate from the building.

It is being pushed out, not being allowed to go into freefall.

Something is pushing back and out FIRMLY.

This means the large sheet is not yet separate from it's supports.

It is being "peeled".
 
Last edited:
Miragememories said:
Someone left the windows open in a building with sealed windows.
How interesting.
MM
Click to expand...
Damage from falling panels took out windows! There are witnesses who reported broken windows below the impact zone. Smart guy, how much do these panels weigh?
879046a66b7c96bf7.jpg

No broken windows could be from these panel falling along the WTC. But there were broken windows. What super shallow research have your learned from the all hearsay expert, make it up otherwise, no work, what me research something first ethic of LCF, and the Dylan Avery School of no experience talks and dumb people listen.

How typical. No facts, just talk.
 
Major_Tom said:
I agree it is a perimeter column but I want to zoom in as much as the resolution will allow and repost the magnified cropped image. It is falling so far below and so much quicker than any other rubble that it is of special interest.
It also can help give us a totally new perspective as to what a trajectory of a freefalling heavy body looks like.

This is how fast a freefalling heavy body actually falls to the ground.

Any help would be appreciated.
Click to expand...

Here you go...

What appears to be interesting here is the start of another section peeling which is directly adjacent to a light flash (circled).

wtcsmall1061is1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Major_Tom said:
[qimg]http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911_math/mech_room_perimeter.jpg[/qimg]


These perimeter columns are clearly speared into the earth.

They were pushed outwards and fell close to 80 floors. They were then speared into the earth with obvious extreme force.

Despite this, they held up well and exhibit no noticable buckling along their lengths.
Click to expand...

No buckling along their lengths? None? Not even a little? My monitor is screwed up.

Major Tom I think it may be a good time for you to look up the terms "terminal velocity", "surface area" and "air resistance". These may be important terms in the ensuing discussion.
 
Miragememories said:
Someone left the windows open in a building with sealed windows.

How interesting.

MM
Click to expand...

Ah, got louvers?

For the 90 story beaut that I'm workin' on, I've helped spec out louver requirements for mechanical rooms on floors 1, 2, 28, 66 & 88.
 
Newtons Bit said:
Wait, are you being serious?
Click to expand...

Yes, please tell us exactly what is making these "non-perfect-axial strikes" that result in the perimeter columns being peeled off, for example these I have highlighted here:

wtcsmall1061is1.jpg
 
Last edited:
bofors said:
Yes, please tell us exactly what is making these "non-perfect-axial strikes" that result in the perimeter columns being off, for example these I have highlighted here:

[qimg]http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/5135/wtcsmall1061is1.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

I think the upper block being rotated and striking the lower block in an angle might produce axial strikes that are not concentric, don't you? And of course, it's entirely reasonable that with even a minor rotation of the upper block, the upper block columns will not be striking the lower block columns at all.

Can you really not understand that?
 
Newtons Bit said:
I think the upper block being rotated and striking the lower block in an angle might produce axial strikes that are not concentric, don't you? And of course, it's entirely reasonable that with even a minor rotation of the upper block, the upper block columns will not be striking the lower block columns at all.

Can you really not understand that?
Click to expand...
I congratulate your patience in your response. I look at what they ask and say "are you stupid". Us laymen appreciate your patience and learn from your expertize.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom