NIST Issues Warning to those working in buildings

OH MY. I guess this is what (I think it was) Crazy Chainsaw meant when he was warning us of the new wave of retardedness.
 
Galileo said:
NIST has issued a warning that could apply to anyone working in a "tall" building. To me, a tall building would be a building so tall that I'd be afraid to jump out the window.

I'm confused. Should I stay away from work until this threat is neutralized?

EMERGENCY WARNING FOR OFFICE WORKERS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7U22m9xLrQ&eurl=http://www.911blogger.com/blog
Click to expand...

It seems thermal expansion is the "new truth cry"
Might I suggest that you look up expansion joints, & control joints which are common in masonry and concrete construction. I would also suggest you refer to refer to Appendix 4 of the 2005 specification codes for steel buildings and get back to me on that subject.

That video is nothing but a troll and an insult to architectural and engineering practices.
 
If you're up near the top you will be safe standing outside of your window because the lower part of the building will stop the top from collapsing.
 
I suggest you stay away from all buildings, concrete, electrical appliances, computers, cars, people, ....
 
I didn’t open the link but is that a joke? How many times are warnings given out because of first time in history events? What's the likelihood of it happening ever again when it’s never happened before and hasn't happened since? Maybe NIST can recommend parachutes at every window first come first serve. I mean if they’re just going to pretend to be of any value to anyone. How much money did those useless reports cost anyway?

Yeah right. I feel safer already. Don’t go into a tall building period. Because you never know what might happen. Ok NIST. Gotcha. Thanks.
 
Kudos on the video twoofers, that's one of your better efforts. Just one quibble:

What exactly does the term "Small, ordinary office fire" mean? I mean, I've been on google for hours now and I cannot find anything comparable to WTC 7. How exactly can these fires be described as small and ordinary when there really is no precedent for what we witnessed on 9/11?
 
Last edited:
Galileo said:
NIST has issued a warning that could apply to anyone working in a "tall" building. To me, a tall building would be a building so tall that I'd be afraid to jump out the window.

I'm confused. Should I stay away from work until this threat is neutralized?

EMERGENCY WARNING FOR OFFICE WORKERS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7U22m9xLrQ&eurl=http://www.911blogger.com/blog
Click to expand...

The guy who did that video has a total lack of knowledge on this topic makes him appear to be an idiot. Lack of knowledge and spreading stupid ideas. An idiot!

Are you joking? No one can be this stupid. It must be a joke.

No explosives at WTC7, the noise was not heard. Wait, truther dolts used thermite; what a dirt dumb idea.

Good post the stupid 9/11 truth video of the day. A dolt video.
 
AJM8125 said:
Kudos on the video twoofers, that's one of your better efforts. Just one quibble:

What exactly does the term "Small, ordinary office fire" mean? I mean, I've been on google for hours now and I cannot find anything comparable to WTC 7. How exactly can fires these be described as small and ordinary when there really is no precedent for what we witnessed on 9/11?
Click to expand...

How many floors were on fire? All? Half? 25%? I'm pretty sure entire buildings have been on fire for longer periods of time without suffering global collapse caused by thermal expansion.
 
Homeland Insurgency said:
How many floors were on fire? All? Half? 25%? I'm pretty sure entire buildings have been on fire for longer periods of time without suffering global collapse caused by thermal expansion.
Click to expand...
And yet the world's experts are not rushing to join the truth movement... I wonder why?
 
Homeland Insurgency said:
How many floors were on fire? All? Half? 25%?
Click to expand...
"SMALL" is relative... The twin towers had upwards of 10 floors worth of fire at the worst, compared to what? 110 stories? Of course compare to most other building fires it's as large if not larger because of the scale of the building. At this point I'm not into arguing semantics like this

Homeland Insurgency said:
I'm pretty sure entire buildings have been on fire for longer periods of time without suffering global collapse cause by thermal expansion.
Click to expand...
And like any responsible skeptic you must consider design parameters, materials, and every bell an whistle to make such a comparison as close as possible. Simply applying this in general does not justify a means to an end when dealing with a unique building design and situation
 
My favourite parts were when they claimed thermal expansion is a new physical phenomena, and that the fires in WTC7 were "small, ordinary office fires".

Well hey, who knew that being in a building that has been on fire for several hours could be dangerous? Only everyone involved at ground zero that day, which is why there are no fatalities recorded due to WTC7s collapse.

It would be sad if it were not so funny that people still make videos like this in 2008.
 
e^n said:
My favourite parts were when they claimed thermal expansion is a new physical phenomena
Click to expand...

That myth of theirs is alone debunked by the very fact that the code specifications for most forms of construction require some consideration for thermal expansion regardless... if it were never a problem before, then why would they have considered it in the first place? Same for everything else :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom