29 Structural & Civil Engineers Cite Evidence for Controlled Explosive Demolition

[Shalamar]

Correct.

Wrong.

9-1 Vol.2 pg 588 [pdf 250]
When all the exterior columns had buckled, as shown in Figure 12-62, the entire building above the buckled-column region moved downward as a single unit, resulting in the global collapse of WTC 7.

What are your engineering credentials that you can critique the NIST report?

 

[Christopher7]

But you trust an anonymous guy on the internet who not only claims his name is Richard Gage and is an architect, but also claims that he has verified credentials of other anonymous people?

Richard Gage AIA is NOT anonymous. The 29 engineers are NOT anonymous. You are being silly.

 

[Christopher7]

What are your engineering credentials that you can critique the NIST report?

Get serious. It is not necessary to be an engineer to understand the key information report.

9-1 Vol.2 pg 588 [pdf 250]
When all the exterior columns had buckled, as shown in Figure 12-62, the entire building above the buckled-column region moved downward as a single unit, resulting in the global collapse of WTC 7.

1-A pg 45
In Stage 2, the north face descended at gravitational acceleration, as the buckled columns provided negligible support to the upper portion of the north face. This free fall drop continued for approximately 8 stories or 32.0 m (105 ft), the distance traveled between times t = 1.75 s and t = 4.0 s.

This was written in terms that anyone except a devout denier can understand.

 

[Newtons Bit]

Richard Gage AIA is NOT anonymous. The 29 engineers are NOT anonymous. You are being silly.

It's no more silly than either me or Architect being truly "anonymous".

Gordon Ross went through a bunch of trouble to stalk me on the internet to figure out my name from my handle. He figured out that I actually am a structural engineer. And aside from mocking me for living in New Mexico, he didn't do much else.

 

[rwguinn]

Christopher7 is trolling for names he can associate with real people. Once published, twoofers can then harrass and threaten them.
I do not have a "These Premises Protected by Smith and Wesson" sign at my place, but it is implied...

 

[Shalamar]

Get serious. It is not necessary to be an engineer to understand the key information report.

9-1 Vol.2 pg 588 [pdf 250]
When all the exterior columns had buckled, as shown in Figure 12-62, the entire building above the buckled-column region moved downward as a single unit, resulting in the global collapse of WTC 7.

1-A pg 45
In Stage 2, the north face descended at gravitational acceleration, as the buckled columns provided negligible support to the upper portion of the north face. This free fall drop continued for approximately 8 stories or 32.0 m (105 ft), the distance traveled between times t = 1.75 s and t = 4.0 s.

This was written in terms that anyone except a devout denier can understand.

And yet, it has been shown where, and how you were wrong. So I ask.

What are your engineering credentials?

 

[H'ethetheth]

Correct.

Wrong.

9-1 Vol.2 pg 588 [pdf 250]
When all the exterior columns had buckled, as shown in Figure 12-62, the entire building above the buckled-column region moved downward as a single unit, resulting in the global collapse of WTC 7.

So what happened from -6 to 0 s in the timeline that made the penthouse fall into the building? And what happened between 0 s and 6.9 s? By the time the north face started falling all the core columns had buckled, there were no columns inside the building below where the east penthouse was, and a 6 story hole in the south west face. Furthermore, I read on page 588 (pdf 250) that

As the interior columns buckled across the building, the exterior columns were left laterally unsupported normal to the east, south and north faces.

I call that a gutted building.

And more pertinently: What the hell is your point? What are we supposed to conclude from the fact that the north facade fell unimpeded over 30 m?

 

[Christopher7]

Christopher7 is trolling for names he can associate with real people. Once published, twoofers can then harrass and threaten them.
I do not have a "These Premises Protected by Smith and Wesson" sign at my place, but it is implied...

Richard Gage AIA and the 29 engineers had the stones to use their real names. The self proclaimed experts here do not. All are subject to the same harassment potential.

 

[twinstead]

And more pertinently: What the hell is your point? What are we supposed to conclude from the fact that the north facade fell unimpeded over 30 m?

Inside job!!!!1111!!11!!!

 

[twinstead]

Richard Gage AIA and the 29 engineers had the stones to use their real names. The self proclaimed experts here do not. All are subject to the same harassment potential.

The only risk the 29 "engineers" took by using their real names is to be thought of as idiots.

 

[FineWine]

The building was falling at low speed. All that is irrelevant and you know it.

A building cannot fall at free fall acceleration and crush framework. Free fall acceleration can only occur if there is NO resistance. You know that too.

The graph shows free fall acceleration for 2.25 seconds. The error is the line NIST overlayed turns down at 4s when the data dots go up. This is irrelevant as free fall occurred between 1.75s and 4s.

David chandler proved free fall acceleration and forced NIST to admit it. They did in the final report. You are blowing smoke.

On NIST 1A pg 45 it says:
"In Stage 2, the north face descended at gravitational acceleration"
This is another way of saying "free fall acceleration"
They continue:
"This free fall drop continued for approximately 8 stories or 32.0 m (105 ft)"

The entire building* fell at free fall [gravitational] acceleration for 105 feet.

* 9-1 Vol.2 pg 588 [pdf 250]
"the entire building above the buckled-column region moved downward as a single unit, resulting in the global collapse of WTC 7."

Incredible. No matter how carefully and patiently tfk explains it, you can't learn a thing.

 

[J. Wellington Wimpy]

Incredible. No matter how carefully and patiently tfk explains it, you can't learn a thing.

Not "can't"; won't.

 

[Christopher7]

So what happened from -6 to 0 s in the timeline that made the penthouse fall into the building? And what happened between 0 s and 6.9 s? By the time the north face started falling all the core columns had buckled, there were no columns inside the building below where the east penthouse was, and a 6 story hole in the south west face. Furthermore, I read on page 588 (pdf 250) that
I call that a gutted building.

What part of

"the entire building above the buckled-column region moved downward as a single unit"

don't you understand?

The time line you are referring to does not articulate what happened during the horizontal collapse. Please read [FONT=&quot]1-9 Vol.2 [/FONT][FONT=&quot]pages 579-585 [pdf 241-247][/FONT] for a complete description of the collapse sequence starting with the collapse of column 79 and ending just before the beginning of 'global collapse'.

And more pertinently: What the hell is your point? What are we supposed to conclude from the fact that the north facade fell unimpeded over 30 m?

If you can't figure that out for yourself, you know nothing about the laws of physics.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

We serious structural engineers...

Kayser, Sunder, Gross & Co at NIST have never done a proper structural damage analysis in their lives.

Tell us again about how pizza boxes replicate the Twin Towers.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

And more pertinently: What the hell is your point? What are we supposed to conclude from the fact that the north facade fell unimpeded over 30 m?

That's kind of the hilarious irony... they used to say that freefall global collapse was only possible through demolition. Now they're claiming that partial freefall is a controlled demolition. The goal post shifting is most delicious...

 

[Regnad Kcin]

On the contrary, these people are qualified to understand that the Trade Towers and WTC 7 could not have collapsed the way they did without explosives.

There were no explosives. None.

How interesting that you and those who share your belief can't provide a molecule of evidence for it.

 

[Christopher7]

Tell us again about how pizza boxes replicate the Twin Towers.

Tell me how WTC 7 could fall at free fall acceleration.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

The only risk the 29 "engineers" took by using their real names is to be thought of as idiots.

Just to put a kink in C7's argument (I have him on ignore), the people who wrote the NIST report by that same logic have used their real names at the cost of constant harassment by gross incompetents. I believe these names are also available for the Purdue simulations as well are they not?

 

[Christopher7]

That's kind of the hilarious irony... they used to say that freefall global collapse was only possible through demolition. Now they're claiming that partial freefall is a controlled demolition. The goal post shifting is most delicious...

Any free fall rules out a progressive collapse because it is, by definition, a continuous chain of failures, each one leading to the next. The building could not fall at free fall and do any other work like buckling columns.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Fear thee not. I shall go forth and spread the truth. But I feel compelled, from time to time, to 'bore' you with the facts.

Will you be "go[ing] forth" until your dying day? Because, try as you might, you can't make something true that wasn't.

You, and those like you, have hitched your wagon not to a horse but rather a unicorn. Not a donkey, mule, camel, ox or pachyderm. A unicorn.

A reminder: unicorns don't exist.