TC329: If WTC7 collapsed into its own footprint, please explain this...

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Fire alone cannot collapse a steel skyscraper especially completely into its own footprint at free fall speed.

Yes it can.

That's why building codes everywhere demand the installation of fireproofing for buildings like WTC7.

Only an idiot would be incapable of grasping this.

 

[The Big Dog]

Fire alone cannot collapse a steel skyscraper especially completely into its own footprint at free fall speed.

Where's the report from NIST proving that statement wrong? It's been 7 years.

IDIOT.

That is the problem with Twoofers like this Az politician, they flat out make stuff up like "at free fall speed" and then expect NIST to debunk their fantasies.

 

[beachnut]

Fire alone cannot collapse a steel skyscraper especially completely into its own footprint at free fall speed.

Where's the report from NIST proving that statement wrong? It's been 7 years.

IDIOT.

Fires that are no fought destroy. Sorry, you must of missed some facts when you get all excited calling people idiots when you are the one who lack knowledge and makes up stories. How is that math coming? The non-paths, and the non-theories? Your lack of physics is showing.

Notice the parts of the building that fell, the steel collapsed, and the building would have fallen but the fighters were able to use hoses and protect the lower floors. If the fire was not fought, it would have failed completely, but it was only TOTALED. The building was too weak, it is gone; a fire destroyed a skyscraper. Collapse is a concern and not new to firemen. Only people who lack knowledge, like the person in the OP, are dumb enough to fall for 9/11 truths lies and false information. It is the 7th year and still no one in 9/11 truth has a clue what happen, or can say what happen on 9/11. No evidence yet from 9/11. Who is misleading you?
The concrete core, and firefighting held the core up, and saved the rest. WTC had no concrete core, except for a few insane people who claim there is a concrete core. LOL

Show me a fire not fought by men or systems that has not fallen. I have seen hundreds of metal buildings collapsed due to fire. You are too young and not a good reseracher. FAILED

The real funny part is the "squibs:". The person in the OP is clueless. You are not helping her at all.

And speaking of pulverized concrete, fire does not pulverize concrete. Even the collapse of one floor upon another wouldn't pulverize concrete the way the Twin Towers disintegrated.

Clueless (no evidence to support her statement), just talk and false information, like CIT. Is this why you feel the need to support clueless false information merchants?

 

[TC329]

Yes it can.

That's why building codes everywhere demand the installation of fireproofing for buildings like WTC7.

Only an idiot would be incapable of grasping this.

So is your claim that there was no fireproofing in WTC7 or that it got knocked off by a plane?

 

[TC329]

That is the problem with Twoofers like this Az politician, they flat out make stuff up like "at free fall speed" and then expect NIST to debunk their fantasies.

Let me guess you believe WTC7 came down in stages over a period of several hours like Ghouliani says, right? LOL

 

[MarkyX]

Fire alone cannot collapse a steel skyscraper especially completely into its own footprint at free fall speed.

See the bolded part? That's you making **** up.

 

[TC329]

Fires that are no fought destroy. Sorry, you must of missed some facts when you get all excited calling people idiots when you are the one who lack knowledge and makes up stories.

1) Please show evidence of a steel skyscraper that collapsed due to fire (WTC1 & WTC2 are excluded).

2) Please show evidence of steel skyscrapers suffering asymetrical damage collapsing in symetrical fashion due to fires.

You speak with such authority you must have tons of examples and evidence to back up your extraordinary claims.

 

[TC329]

See the bolded part? That's you making **** up.

So you have two claims....

1) WTC7 did not collapse into its own footprint.

2) WTC7 did not collapse in under 7 seconds.

Yeah ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ok thats you making **** up. All someone has to do is look at an aerial shot and watch a video to see you're full of ****. lol

How long did the 9/11 Commission say it took for WTC1 & WTC2 to collapse?

 

[A W Smith]

Dom';

Were the fires fought? yes or no?

What happens to steel structures in cases where there is no attempt to put out the fires?

start another thread dom, or is it a new infowar tactic to create off topic posts in threads here?

 

[MarkyX]

So you have two claims....

1) WTC7 did not collapse into its own footprint.

2) WTC7 did not collapse in under 7 seconds.

1) If it did fell on it's own footprint, explain why the debris was found on the streets and beyond.

2) Seismic data says otherwise. I don't accept edited videos from 9/11 deniers as evidence.

 

[pomeroo]

So is your claim that there was no fireproofing in WTC7 or that it got knocked off by a plane?

What was your opinion of Arthur Scheuerman's paper on WTC 7? Oh, you didn't? Well, maybe you should read it.

 

[Alferd_Packer]

2) WTC7 did not collapse in under 7 seconds.

TC, why are you ignoring the fact that the collapse of WTC 7 started when the penthouses fell into the building?

 

[CurtC]

Notice the parts of the building that fell, the steel collapsed, and the building would have fallen but the fighters were able to use hoses and protect the lower floors.

In case TC missed it, the steel-framed portion of this building completely collapsed, even though the fire was being fought. The only parts left standing were concrete-framed.

 

[The Big Dog]

Let me guess you believe WTC7 came down in stages over a period of several hours like Ghouliani says, right? LOL

As with the Arizona senator, you appear to be laboring under a delusion that WTC7 collapsed in 7 seconds. The evidence is clear that from initiation of the collapse of the mechanical penthouse to the end of the collapse of the entire structure was significantly longer than 7 seconds, and thus much longer than free fall.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

So is your claim that there was no fireproofing in WTC7 or that it got knocked off by a plane?

No, only an idiot would make that assumption about my post.

Your original claim was that fire cannot cause a steel framed structure to collapse. Were this the case, fireproofing would not exist. There would be no need for it. It would have no effect on efforts to evacuate burning steel framed structures, it would not prevent loss of life or significant property damage. Ergo, no one would pay for it nor would governments create building codes requiring it (unless there were a conspiracy by fireproofing manufacturers and installers to scam the public).

But fireproofing does exist. Building codes around the world do require its installation in steel framed structures. The only logical explanation for this would be that fire can and does threaten steel framed structures and it is needed to prevent property damage and loss of life.

So the choice before you is to explain the existence of fireproofing, or concede that you are wrong.

 

[gumboot]

Has any truther ever actually cited a major fire in a steel-only skyscraper at all?

I don't know of any, primarily because:
A) Steel-framed skyscrapers are not that common
B) Fires in skyscrapers are very rare.
C) Major fires in skyscrapers are even rarer.

Thus the odds of a major fire occuring in a steel-framed skyscraper is exceedingly rare. Unless conspiracy theorists can cite a steel-only sky scraper that suffered a major fire and didn't collapse, they have no argument at all.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Fire alone cannot collapse a steel skyscraper especially completely into its own footprint at free fall speed.

Where's the report from NIST proving that statement wrong?

Where is the statement from NIST or any other entity in the entire universe claiming that anything like that ever happened?

Tell me ... don't you ever feel a little sickened by your own dishonesty? You know, don't you just want to throw up in your mouth a little bit?

 

[WildCat]

TC, why are you ignoring the fact that the collapse of WTC 7 started when the penthouses fell into the building?

Because you can't be a self-proclaimed leader of the truth movement without being a habitual liar. It's a core requirement.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

In the "AZ's Truth Senator gets Opinion letter in AZ Paper - Open for comments" thread, you stated...

Fire alone cannot collapse a steel skyscraper especially completely into its own footprint at free fall speed.

Here's a picture of the remains of WTC7 and its immediate surroundings:

Pay particular attention to the building on the right, near the bottom of this picture. Now, please explain to everyone here how that building came to be damaged if WTC7 had collapsed into its own footprint.

 

[Arus808]

Have him explain the damage done to the Verizon building, the side that wAS facing WTC 7