• 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.

The usual bunch is not happy with WTC 7 report, suggest revision

Christopher7 said:
The NIST simulation puts the fire in the offices just to the east of column 81.
Click to expand...

I scaled the NIST photo and the floor plan and put this image together with MS Paint. I have no access to better programs right now, but this gives a very rough idea of where the fires were according to the NIST simulation at 2:00 p.m. I only inserted the area of worst fire with red markings. Column 81 is the black dot.

1363948d349e11c6d5.jpg


So the worst fire is around column 81, and along the 2 corridors leading to the east face.
 
Last edited:
ref said:
I scaled the NIST photo and the floor plan and put this image together with MS Paint. I have no access to better programs right now, but this gives a very rough idea of where the fires were according to the NIST simulation at 2:00 p.m. I only inserted the area of worst fire with red markings. Column 81 is the black dot.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/1363948d349e11c6d5.jpg

So the worst fire is around column 81, and along the 2 corridors leading to the east face.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your work, it's quite good enough. I would have put the fire a little to the east but the point is still the same.

The NIST fire simulation for 2:00 p.m. seems to be off by about 1/2 hour and the 3:00 p.m. by an hour. [and the fire has 'jumped' to the north wall]
The 4:00 p.m and 5:00 p.m. bear no resemblance to the photos.

The 5:00 p.m. graphic is absurd. It has fire burning in some of the same areas for an hour and it is nothing like the photo* showing fire at the west end.

*NIST says "5:00 p.m. - time uncertainty is at least ten minutes". In other words, before the photo mentioned in NIST Apx. L pg 26:
Around 4:45 p.m., a photograph showed fires Floors 7, 8, 9, and 11 near the middle of the north face; Floor 12 was burned out by this time.

NIST did not include this photograph or statement in their final report.

The fire on floor 12 had burned out in the east end around 4:00 p.m.
 
Christopher7 said:
Thank you for your work, it's quite good enough. I would have put the fire a little to the east but the point is still the same.

The NIST fire simulation for 2:00 p.m. seems to be off by about 1/2 hour
Click to expand...

You have a photo showing flames in east face at 2:08 and change. Do you have any explanation why you assume that there also was a fire present at 2:00, rather than a fire on its way towards the east face at that time along the corridor?

Christopher7 said:
and the 3:00 p.m. by an hour. [and the fire has 'jumped' to the north wall]
Click to expand...

Once again, I have no access to the report, but I remember the large photo of the north face showing only yellow glow from the windows, not any actual flames? What makes you think fire was present there at 3:00, rather than the windows showing the glow of the still approaching but not yet present fire?
 
ref said:
You have a photo showing flames in east face at 2:08 and change. Do you have any explanation why you assume that there also was a fire present at 2:00, rather than a fire on its way towards the east face at that time along the corridor?
Click to expand...
The fire was present in several windows which means it had been going there for several minutes, possibly more.
The NIST simulation has the fire 40 feet away. That just doesn't match up.

Once again, I have no access to the report,
Click to expand...
BS
They're at nist.gov as if you didn't know.

Related Documents

but I remember the large photo of the north face showing only yellow glow from the windows, not any actual flames? What makes you think fire was present there at 3:00, rather than the windows showing the glow of the still approaching but not yet present fire?
Click to expand...
These photos:

2575ot2.png


3055qg5.jpg


3135wf2.jpg


3422md3.jpg
 
ref said:
I scaled the NIST photo and the floor plan and put this image together with MS Paint. I have no access to better programs right now, but this gives a very rough idea of where the fires were according to the NIST simulation at 2:00 p.m. I only inserted the area of worst fire with red markings. Column 81 is the black dot.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/1363948d349e11c6d5.jpg

So the worst fire is around column 81, and along the 2 corridors leading to the east face.
Click to expand...

Please note this fire started near the stairwell where Jennings and Hess experienced the explosion from the oil-filled transformers.
 
Chris7, there were pressure differences and internal flows. How can you say how the fire behaved under those conditions and say NIST is definitely wrong? The fires could go back and forth, not just linear and exactly timed progress around the building. And there were internal fires not visible from the windows. Even NIST says that it was difficult to develop detailed timelines for burning on the four faces of the building.

Even if they were off a little with their timeline, do you disagree with their overall theory? The column 79 and fire theory?

Or do you have thermite in mind? Or are you pointing how NIST is wrong with photo analysis, but offer nothing else?
 
ref said:
"The fires could go back and forth, not just linear and exactly timed progress around the building."
Click to expand...
Are you really serious?

What mechanism would allow and encourage fires to return without the addition of more office furniture as fuel?

MM
 
Miragememories said:
Are you really serious?

What mechanism would allow and encourage fires to return without the addition of more office furniture as fuel?

MM
Click to expand...

I knew someone would pick on this.

I mean going west/east or north/south in one place, and coming back in the other row of offices/corridors.

But as I have stated, I am no expert in this. But neither is Christopher.
 
Last edited:
ref said:
I knew someone would pick on this.

I mean going west/east or north/south in one place, and coming back in the other row of offices/corridors.

But as I have stated, I am no expert in this. But neither is Christopher.
Click to expand...
Christopher at least presents a rational argument which does not require him to be an expert.

Your explanation appears to be nothing more than a desperate "grasping at straws" in order to defend a NIST hypothesis you appear to be too closed-minded to question rationally.

MM
 
MaGZ said:
Please note this fire started near the stairwell where Jennings and Hess experienced the explosion from the oil-filled transformers.
Click to expand...
NIST doesn't make that claim but nice try. The transformers were on floors 5 or 6.
The fire on floor 12 started about where they pictured it, cause unknown.
 
ref said:
I mean going west/east or north/south in one place, and coming back in the other row of offices/corridors.
Click to expand...
Please, the fire was in the offices away from the east wall and would burn in all directions including north through adjacent offices. The fire on the north face spread out in both directions much faster than it could by burning from office to office. This clearly indicates a fire approaching from the south in an arc as i depicted. This is not rocket science, just logical deduction from the photographic evidence.

As i said before, the fire would consume everything from the origin of the fire to the north face on it's way to the north face.
 
Tbone said:
Interesting. One does not need to be an expert on fire behaviour to understand it properly, apparently.
Click to expand...
Correct.
The frequent assertion made here that only an expert can figure out the obvious is just a denial tactic.
Fires ignite adjacent fuel and spread out in all directions. This may be a concept that is difficult for you to understand but it does not require a college education.
 
Last edited:
Christopher7 said:
Correct.
The frequent assertion made here that only an expert can figure out the obvious is just a denial tactic.
Fires ignite adjacent fuel and spread out in all directions. This may be a concept that is difficult for you to understand but it does not require a college education.
Click to expand...

Interesting. Wind and pressure gradients do not exist in your mind.
 
Christopher7 said:
The frequent assertion made here that only an expert can figure out the obvious is just a denial tactic.
Click to expand...

What makes it even worse is that if anyone ever does point to an expert's opinion on the matter, the "appeal to authority" logical fallacy comments start flying. Of course, both are just denial tactics. One allows them to avoid the substance of what is said as unworthy of addressing (ie. because it's not from an expert). The other allows them to discount the substance of the statement as a logical fallacy (ie. because it is from an expert), and thereby not address it. How convenient.
 
Tbone said:
Interesting. Wind and pressure gradients do not exist in your mind.
Click to expand...
Wind? Pressure gradients? In an office fire? Please.
I suppose you are going to claim to be a expert and technobabble.

With a consistent fuel supply, a fire will progress in a consistent manner.

You are just trying to avoid the obvious with double talk.

The NIST fire simulations bear NO resemblance to the photographs.
 
Christopher7 said:
Wind? Pressure gradients? In an office fire? Please.
Click to expand...

You think an office fire resembles a fire in an open space with no air movement? Collapsed floors, collapsing floors, broken windows can all cause interruptions to fire movement or change its direction entirely.

Also, why would I claim to be an expert? You don't think I would need to be one, therefor my considerations are just as valid as yours.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom