Merged 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dave Rogers said:
Something like that, maybe. The photo on the page I linked is most likely a picture of that assembly. They wouldn't need to run right through the hat truss; the job of the hat truss was to support the antenna, and if the antenna had connected directly to the core then the hat truss would have been redundant.



The connection shown in the photograph looks more than adequate. The majority of the forces would have been torque rather than lateral force, and the guy wires were there to handle that.

There's a 1000 foot radio mast not far from where I live, held up by fifteen bracing wires. The connection at the base is remarkably small, in fact it looks more like a pivot than a solid connection. The WTC1 antenna connection looks a good deal more solid to me.

Dave
Click to expand...
I thought that the hat truss had the vital function of tying all the elements together at the top of the building ? Redistributing loads between the core and the perimeter columns and so on ? The antenna appears to hhave been an afterhought given that iit was not added until years after the buiding was complete. So the antenna design and attachment would have had to be tailored to work with and around an already in-place component.

To make the antenna safe the only logical thing to do would be to attach it to the core so that when he wind acted on the building and caused it to sway in one direction at a particular force that the antenna, as an extension of the core would go with it and suffer the minimum possible stress. To be welded directly to the core means it had to pass through the hat truss. In any case attaching directly only to the hat truss could have caused interference in it's normal and vital function.

In that antenna you mention ...the 1,000 foot one. how far are the furtthest guy ropes fixed in the ground away from the tower ? It must be quite a long way for such a tall structure to get the desired angle. In WTC1 the furthest away that such cables could be fixed at 'ground' level was about 100 feet whch is not a lot.Obviously support cables cannot be too close to vertical for maximum efficiency.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM&eurl=http://www.911blogger.com/&feature=player_embedded
Click to expand...

I still cant comprehend
why
"truthers" think that explosives = rockets propelling the building downwards

DEMOS INITIATE COLLAPSE
no matter what happens when a structure loses its supports
be it either from a fire, impact, or explosives
the end result is a collapse

explosives do not change this

ALSO
sickening in this video is that the news station apparently uses all the footage gage brought with him
NONE OF WHICH SHOW THE EAST PENTHOUSE COLLAPSING WHICH WOULD INDICATE THAT COLLAPSE WAS A SLOW PROCESS OVER ALMOST 20 SECONDS

ask "fitterman hall" if 7 fell into its own footprint .....
 
Justin39640 said:
I still cant comprehend
why
"truthers" think that explosives = rockets propelling the building downwards

DEMOS INITIATE COLLAPSE
no matter what happens when a structure loses its supports
be it either from a fire, impact, or explosives
the end result is a collapse

explosives do not change this

ALSO
sickening in this video is that the news station apparently uses all the footage gage brought with him
NONE OF WHICH SHOW THE EAST PENTHOUSE COLLAPSING WHICH WOULD INDICATE THAT COLLAPSE WAS A SLOW PROCESS OVER ALMOST 20 SECONDS

ask "fitterman hall" if 7 fell into its own footprint .....
Click to expand...

Most people who saw that will think 'it definately looked like a controlled demolition'- mainly because it did. And if they are smart hey will go online and find some of the 650,000 9/11 websites that will bring them up to speed on the rest of it. Some might even be reading this right now. If you are...9/11 was definately an inside job.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM&eurl=http://www.911blogger.com/&feature=player_embedded
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
Most people who saw that will think 'it definately looked like a controlled demolition'- mainly because it did. And if they are smart hey will go online and find some of the 650,000 9/11 websites that will bring them up to speed on the rest of it. Some might even be reading this right now. If you are...9/11 was definately an inside job.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM&eurl=http://www.911blogger.com/&feature=player_embedded
Click to expand...
There comes a time when your posts betray your ignorance on 911.

You post lies about 911. When rational people research 911 they will see you have no evidence and you repeat and support moronic delusions about 911.
 
beachnut said:
There comes a time when your posts betray your ignorance on 911.

You post lies about 911. When rational people research 911 they will see you have no evidence and you repeat and support moronic delusions about 911.
Click to expand...

I can't even access my account to post a comment on google now. I love this. It's so obvious and in your face.
 
Last edited:
Toke said:
The NWO is on to you and want to silence you?
Click to expand...

I've seen this before when somebody mounted the BBC 23-minutes-before video. There was such an outcry that Google got so embarrassed that they actually had spokesmen on the comments section posting aologies for why the counter was not counting the hits. That was a lot of fun.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
Most people who saw that will think 'it definately looked like a controlled demolition'- mainly because it did. And if they are smart hey will go online and find some of the 650,000 9/11 websites that will bring them up to speed on the rest of it. Some might even be reading this right now. If you are...9/11 was definately an inside job.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM&eurl=http://www.911blogger.com/&feature=player_embedded
Click to expand...


"like" is a simile. Nobody that was an eyewitness to WTC thinks it was a man-made demolition.

19 English majors lead by a professor of English hiding in his ivory tower executed the events of 9/11.
 
Last edited:
Toke said:
The NWO is on to you and want to silence you?
Click to expand...

Yeah. We ... er, I mean, they ... they fear Bill profoundly. Dunno how he's managed to survive as a fearless and outspoken truth-seeker for quite so long, frankly (m'dear). What with his having his finger right on the pulse of this massive NWO conspiracy and being able to BLOW it sky-high any moment and all. You know ol' Bill cracked it? Just like that? He really did. He noticed there wasn't enough rebar lying about at GZ in those cleanup photos, therefore .... um ... well, therefore something, and it was really really significant and Time magazine should be notified. Or maybe there should be poll on an interwebs forum. Or something.

Bless.
 
GlennB said:
Yeah. We ... er, I mean, they ... they fear Bill profoundly. Dunno how he's managed to survive as a fearless and outspoken truth-seeker for quite so long, frankly (m'dear). What with his having his finger right on the pulse of this massive NWO conspiracy and being able to BLOW it sky-high any moment and all. You know ol' Bill cracked it? Just like that? He really did. He noticed there wasn't enough rebar lying about at GZ in those cleanup photos, therefore .... um ... well, therefore something, and it was really really significant and Time magazine should be notified. Or maybe there should be poll on an interwebs forum. Or something.

Bless.
Click to expand...

I could not have put it better.:)
 
bill smith said:
I can't even access my account to post a comment on google now. I love this. It's so obvious and in your face.
Click to expand...
Gage is allowed to be on TV and spew dirt dumb ideas; free country. And you are allowed to believe his moronic delusions. Free Country.

You are allowed to believe idiots and what they say. Your weak verbal support does not make their lies get closer to reality; it only exposes your lack of knowledge on the subjects required to understand reality.

I was lucky my parents inspired me to go to engineering school which makes it easier to see Gage is a flaming idiot on 911. My masters degree in engineering makes it unfair to judge your hearsay, fantasy based opinions. It feels like I am cheating. 0.00087 percent of all engineers support ideas like your opinions and delusions on 911.
 
beachnut said:
Gage is allowed to be on TV and spew dirt dumb ideas; free country. And you are allowed to believe his moronic delusions. Free Country.

You are allowed to believe idiots and what they say. Your weak verbal support does not make their lies get closer to reality; it only exposes your lack of knowledge on the subjects required to understand reality.

I was lucky my parents inspired me to go to engineering school which makes it easier to see Gage is a flaming idiot on 911. My masters degree in engineering makes it unfair to judge your hearsay, fantasy based opinions. It feels like I am cheating. 0.00087 percent of all engineers support ideas like your opinions and delusions on 911.
Click to expand...

'Allowed to believe' is an interesting choice of phrase Beachnut. It makes you sound like you are somewhere to the right of Attilla the Hun. lol
 
bill smith said:
'Allowed to believe' is an interesting choice of phrase Beachnut. It makes you sound like you are somewhere to the right of Attilla the Hun. lol
Click to expand...
You support liars. What does that make you? You mistake freedom to believe with being right of Attila the Hun. Funny stuff. You mean Attila, or Attilla?

I am saying you are free to believe in idiots and spew their lies freely. If that is right of Attila the Hun then it is clear why you have problems understanding 911.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
Most people who saw that will think 'it definately looked like a controlled demolition'- mainly because it did. And if they are smart hey will go online and find some of the 650,000 9/11 websites that will bring them up to speed on the rest of it. Some might even be reading this right now. If you are...9/11 was definately an inside job.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM&eurl=http://www.911blogger.com/&feature=player_embedded
Click to expand...

i have to agree
that fact you don't recognize/ignore a simile is disturbing
(in a BBC docu on 911 a reporter totally pwns dylan avery on that point when talking about the shanksville coroner VIDEO about 8 minutes in)

you still didnt address the collapse of the east penthouse
why does every truther site edit this out? (deceptive editing)
 
Do you think dropping cardboard boxes on each other proves 9/11 was an inside jobby job, bill?
 
bill smith said:
I thought that the hat truss had the vital function of tying all the elements together at the top of the building ? Redistributing loads between the core and the perimeter columns and so on ? The antenna appears to hhave been an afterhought given that iit was not added until years after the buiding was complete. So the antenna design and attachment would have had to be tailored to work with and around an already in-place component.
Click to expand...

That's not the way I understand it. As far as I'm aware, the initial plan was to have antennae on both buildings, and the primary role of the hat truss was to provide a support for the antenna that spread the load between the core columns and the perimeter columns. However, even if you're right and the antenna on WTC1 was a later addition, it still makes sense to attach it to the hat truss rather than directly to the core. The stiffness of the building against wind stress was provided primarily by the perimeter tube, not the core columns - which were primarily there to support gravity loads - so attaching the antenna directly to the core would provide the minimum, not the maximum, resilience to wind loads.

In any case, the structure in the photograph taken during construction bears such a close and obvious similarity to the structure at the base of the antenna, in terms of spacing, angle and length of the main structural members, that it seems more than likely to me that it's the same structure. In which case, you've seen your answer: there was a massive structure of steel girders connecting the base of the antenna to the hat truss, and the antenna was braced by steel cables.

bill smith said:
In that antenna you mention ...the 1,000 foot one. how far are the furtthest guy ropes fixed in the ground away from the tower ? It must be quite a long way for such a tall structure to get the desired angle. In WTC1 the furthest away that such cables could be fixed at 'ground' level was about 100 feet whch is not a lot.Obviously support cables cannot be too close to vertical for maximum efficiency.
Click to expand...

I don't know how they're fixed, but the geometry looks very similar - I'd say the outer cables are inclined at a similar angle to the cables bracing the WTC1 antenna.

Dave
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom