10 story hole in WTC 7

[Christopher7]

I understand it is your opinion that "they should have" however, they didn't. They didn't announce any plans to use any of the now discarded steel in an official presentation*.
Can you agree to that?

[*proceeding] Yes

Will you now stop saying that it was illegal to discard steel from the WTC site?

No. FEMA's failure to request that the physical evidence be preserved resulted in NIST not having enough to determine the cause of the collapse.

99% of the physical evidence was destroyed before NIST got involved.

NIST studied the samples that FEMA saved and found that:
Most perimeter panels (157 of 160 locations mapped) saw no temperature greater than 250°C
Two core columns in impact area with sufficient paint
• Columns 603 (floors 92-93) and 605 (floors 98-99)
• Paint analysis indicate both columns less than 250°C
[FONT=&quot]http://wtc.nist.gov/media/P3MechanicalandMetAnalysisofSteel.pdf

[/FONT]These temperatures were not sufficient to weaken the perimeter or core columns.
Due to the lack of sufficient physical evidence, NIST was unable to confirm steel temperatures sufficient to cause the initiation of the collapses.

 

[funk de fino]

If they were allowed to inspect and select the evidence at the collapse site, they would have been able to positively identify steel from WTC 7.

All evidence should have been left in place at the site? I do not think you would have had the balls to tell the firefighters that when they were trying to save people. You really are a fantasist aren't you?

NIST would have been able to identify steel framework deformed due to intense fire or severed with cutting charges.

The stleel had already been forensically examined and catalogued

They were part of the collapse.
The question is: why did all three buildings collapse totally?
NIST does not answer this question.
They stop at collapse initiation.

You have either got me on ignore or you are a nasty little liar. NIST answer the collapse theory in their FAQs.

 

[DC]

Removing the steel from ground zero is a good thing, but melt it was a very very bad idea.......

 

[gumboot]

Removing the steel from ground zero is a good thing, but melt it was a very very bad idea.......

What should they have done with it?

 

[DC]

What should they have done with it?

store it till the investigation is completly done.

 

[Christopher7]

I do hope you are not suggesting fire temps in the twin towers did not reach 250 deg C?

No. steel temps did not exceed 250 °C.

The samples saved that they knew the location of pre collapse were the inportant ones Chris. You do know that those samples were sent to independant investigators and they agreed with NIST?

What did they agree on?

Can you verify that the forensic tests carried out at the staging areas did not include explosives checks?

The forensic tests were for DNA.
There was NO mention of forensic tests for explosives in the FEMA or any other reports.

FEMA did report in appendix C:
Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting . . . . . . The eutectic temperature for this mixture strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel beam approached 1,000 °C (1,800 °F)


The only known explanation for these results is Thermate.

 

[DC]

NIST jumped to a conclusion and the total NIST report is only directed in that jumped on conclusion.

 

[applecorped]

lol! Yes, that must be the ONLY explanation! Everything else is bunk and you are right. Feel better now?

 

[DC]

No. steel temps did not exceed 250 °C.

What did they agree on?

The forensic tests were for DNA.
There was NO mention of forensic tests for explosives in the FEMA or any other reports.

FEMA did report in appendix C:
Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting . . . . . . The eutectic temperature for this mixture strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel beam approached 1,000 °C (1,800 °F)


The only known explanation for these results is Thermate.

no they try to explain that away with "acid rain" after collapse.

 

[Christopher7]

All evidence should have been left in place at the site?

No, the location of the physical evidence should have been photographed and it's location plotted before removal. The forensic testing for possible explosives should have been done upon arrival at the salvage sites.

NIST would have been able to identify steel framework deformed due to intense fire or severed with cutting charges.

The stleel had already been forensically examined and catalogued

99% was destroyed. The forensic tests were for DNA.
No pieces could be unambiguously identified as being from WTC 7.

 

[tsig]

Just saying that gravity caused the collapse does not qualify as an answer to how the Trade Towers collapse completely. It has to be proven that gravity caused the total symmetrical collapse of both towers. NIST did not.

The collapses were caused by airplanes creating structural damage and the fires that weakened the steel afterwards.

Once the buildings were no longer able to sustain their own weight gravity took over.

 

[tsig]

No, the location of the physical evidence should have been photographed and it's location plotted before removal. The forensic testing for possible explosives should have been done upon arrival at the salvage sites.


99% was destroyed. The forensic tests were for DNA.
No pieces could be unambiguously identified as being from WTC 7.

How do you test steel for DNA?

 

[Jwheelz]

No. FEMA's failure to request that the physical evidence be preserved resulted in NIST not having enough to determine the cause of the collapse.

99% of the physical evidence was destroyed before NIST got involved.

NIST studied the samples that FEMA saved and found that:
Most perimeter panels (157 of 160 locations mapped) saw no temperature greater than 250°C
Two core columns in impact area with sufficient paint
• Columns 603 (floors 92-93) and 605 (floors 98-99)
• Paint analysis indicate both columns less than 250°C

[/FONT][/COLOR]These temperatures were not sufficient to weaken the perimeter or core columns.
Due to the lack of sufficient physical evidence, NIST was unable to confirm steel temperatures sufficient to cause the initiation of the collapses.

Again, I understand that it is your opinion NIST should have had more of the steel saved. They however never requested to use any of the now disposed of steel in an official proceeding. Your opinion that they should have does not take precedence over the fact that they DIDN'T.

Can you agree that NIST didn't announce plans to use the steel in an official proceeding?

 

[Christopher7]

The collapses were caused by airplanes creating structural damage and the fires that weakened the steel afterwards.

Once the buildings were no longer able to sustain their own weight gravity took over.

That is the official theory, unfortunately, NIST did not conform that either part of that theory.

They cannot confirm steel temperatures above 250 °C.
That isn't hot enough to weaken the perimeter or core columns enough to cause a collapse.

NIST did not explain how gravity caused the total collapse of the Trade Towers.
To say gravity caused the total collapse is speculation, not investigation.

 

[Christopher7]

How do you test steel for DNA?

With a swab.

 

[Evilgiraffe]

....
FEMA did report in appendix C:
Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting . . . . . . The eutectic temperature for this mixture strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel beam approached 1,000 °C (1,800 °F)


The only known explanation for these results is Thermate.

Hold your horses there Christopher. The only thing these results, in isolation, tell us is that this particular piece of steel was hot and in the presence of both oxygen and sulphur.... Nothing more!

We know that there was plenty of heat since the towers were on fire when they collapsed, and continued to smoulder for many weeks afterwards. There was also a plentiful supply of sulphur from wallboard in the towers. I don't think these facts are in dispute, are they?

So, we have a perfectly good explanation for the oxidative corrosion of steel recovered from the rubble pile. Why do we need to invoke thermate to account for these findings?

Oh, that's right, we dont.

 

[Christopher7]

Again, I understand that it is your opinion NIST should have had more of the steel saved. They however never requested to use any of the now disposed of steel in an official proceeding.
Can you agree that NIST didn't announce plans to use the steel in an official proceeding?

FEMA was handling the inspection of the steel. NIST did not get involved until after 99% of the steel had been destroyed.

 

[Jwheelz]

FEMA was handling the inspection of the steel. NIST did not get involved until after 99% of the steel had been destroyed.

So, would it be safe to say that NIST didn't have plans to use the steel in an official proceeding before it was discarded?

 

[GlennB]

No. steel temps did not exceed 250 °C.

What did they agree on?

The forensic tests were for DNA.
There was NO mention of forensic tests for explosives in the FEMA or any other reports.

FEMA did report in appendix C:
Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting . . . . . . The eutectic temperature for this mixture strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel beam approached 1,000 °C (1,800 °F)


The only known explanation for these results is Thermate.

I distinctly recall that - a month or two ago - we discussed the fact that temperatures in office and house fires regularly reach these temperatures. You seemed to accept this at the time, even adding some of the links given to your bookmarks, if I recall correctly.

Did you change your mind?

 

[DC]

I distinctly recall that - a month or two ago - we discussed the fact that temperatures in office and house fires regularly reach these temperatures. You seemed to accept this at the time, even adding some of the links given to your bookmarks, if I recall correctly.

Did you change your mind?

Temperatures of the fires in burning offices yes. But that does not neceseraly mean that the steel will reach those temps.