29 Structural & Civil Engineers Cite Evidence for Controlled Explosive Demolition

[H'ethetheth]

So to a layman like me, what this all means is that:

a- 7-8 stories were unbraced
b- the longer the unbraced length is, when it "goes", it gives less and less resistance the longer that length is, as shown by another poster ( I forget who) to be about 1% in this case.
c- 1% is not discernable on a youtube.
d- the 105 ft is about what the 7-8 stories is.
e- as the graph shows, once the 105 ft fall was finished, the shorter braced lengths gave more resistance to the falling structure
f- so the long unbraced length accounts for the "near freefall" phase
g- this is not unexpected.


About right?

Missed this post yesterday, but not today. Excellent summary!

P.S: It was me, meee!!

 

[Christopher7]

I disagree; I see progress. Some misunderstandings have been cleared away, and this is one of the first times I've seen a truther admit to a mistake.

Can you admit that the north west corner of the roof went from not moving to free fall acceleration?

 

[TruthersLie]

Ummm you seem to miss the point.

It went from not moving and then accelerated (rather quickly) to near freefall acceleration. (over the span of 1.75 seconds).

again and again, so what?

Alienentity has posted several great videos on youtube which shows that not even in CD do the FULL collapses happen at freefall.
so what?

Cherry picking data from a huge report (in different sections, talking about different things) is intellectually dishonest.

 

[Christopher7]

It went from not moving and then accelerated (rather quickly) to near freefall acceleration. (over the span of 1.75 seconds).

No it did not. Did you read this?

The point NIST picked moved down 7 feet in 1.75s. Then north west corner and west wall started moving. At that time "the entire building above the buckled-column region moved downward as a single unit"

David chandler used the north west corner. He established and NIST confirmed free fall acceleration starting when the north west corner started to fall.

NIST used a point at the top of the parapet wall on the roofline aligned with the east edge of the louvers* on the north face where the 'kink' developed. This area starts to descend before onset of global collapse as can be seen in this video:
*dark area in center of top 2 floors
http://nate.flach.s3.amazonaws.com/NIST_WTC7_video1.mov[FONT=&quot]

Left click and hold on the 'button' and slide it back and forth slowly starting with the beginning of the collapse of the screenwall thru the onset of global collapse. [north west corner and west wall start to fall - entire building falling][/FONT]

Cherry picking data from a huge report (in different sections, talking about different things) is intellectually dishonest.

Quoting facts from different parts of the document [about the same thing] is necessary because NIST spread the facts out. Your suggesting that those quotes are not valid because they were "cherry picked" is intellectually dishonest.

 

[jhunter1163]

Cherry picking data from a huge report (in different sections, talking about different things) is intellectually dishonest.

Truthers in the main are intellectually dishonest, with the notable exceptions of Gregory Urich and Frank Greening.

 

[H'ethetheth]

Can you admit that the north west corner of the roof went from not moving to free fall acceleration?

Yes. According to the report, the roof line of the north face took 1.8 seconds to get from 0 to 9.8 m/s², about 7 seconds after the east penthouse started descending.

ETA: Also, in this time span, NIST lists 5 (!) datapoints. In the free-fall phase, 11 more. Do you have any idea how few 16 data points are?

 

[TruthersLie]

No it did not. Did you read this?

The point NIST picked moved down 7 feet in 1.75s. Then north west corner and west wall started moving. At that time "the entire building above the buckled-column region moved downward as a single unit"

emphasis mine. You seem to keep missing this part.

Ummm where wast that point again? On which part of the building? Oh the north west corner. And it moved how far in 1.75 seconds again? Oh it moved 7 feet.

so the collapse started slowly and after 4 seconds had approached freefall.
It collapsed and approached freefall because there was NO support under it... (which is what NIST said in their draft report, and David Chandler so excellently showed.)
your point again? so what? Oh ... it is that you don't understand, but want to feel smart enough to figure it out on your own.

Quoting facts from different parts of the document [about the same thing] is necessary because NIST spread the facts out. Your suggesting that those quotes are not valid because they were "cherry picked" is intellectually dishonest.

When you take "nuggets" from all over a report you are being intellectually dishonest and creating a bastardized version of the report which does not support your argument. It is incredibly intellectually dishonest to cherry pick data, but NOT examine the WHOLE. tsk tsk tsk.

 

[Christopher7]

Can you admit that the north west corner of the roof went from not moving to free fall acceleration?

Yes.

OK.

According to the report, the roof line of the north face took 1.8 seconds to get from 0 to 9.8 m/s², about 7 seconds after the east penthouse started descending.

Your point?

ETA: Also, in this time span, NIST lists 5 (!) datapoints. In the free-fall phase, 11 more. Do you have any idea how few 16 data points are?

That's enough points to determine free fall acceleration. Physics teacher David Chandler and the people at NIST agree.

 

[tfk]

Chris,

Can you admit that the north west corner of the roof went from not moving to free fall acceleration?

If your question implies that it did so instantly (say, in less than 1/4 second), then the correct answer is "No. Because it didn't do that."

Replying to some of the nonsense you spouted earlier...

The timing thing is a diversion. I have given my response.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4842649#post4842649

.
Yeah, that wasn't an answer either. It was a blind & dumb appeal to authority. With emphasis on the latter adjective.

The whole topic of a demolition of any of the WTC Towers is a meaningless diversion.

There is unequivocal, undeniable hard proof, available today, that none of these buildings could possibly have been demolished.

The silly "timing thing" is precisely the topic of this thread, however.

You are saying it was near free fall. This is your premise:

.
Nope, Chris. Not a premise. It's what the data proves.

"In fact, the building does NOT fall at free fall acceleration for THE FIRST 105 feet. Or for the first 2 seconds. It falls near "G" for the time between 2 seconds & 4 seconds. Between 0 & 2 seconds, it falls at dramatically "lower than G" acceleration."

That's the same double talk NIST used to hide free fall and it has been debunked. Free fall acceleration begins at 1.75s and ends at 4s for at total of 2.25s. By including the first 1.75s and averaging NIST deliberately hid the fact that there was a period of free fall acceleration.

.
It ain't double talk. It's proven by the data.

And now, Chris, since I am frankly sick & tired of your ignorance & insults, I'll give you the chance to show what YOU have to offer this conversation. Other than large font, bold print & temper tantrums.

You provide YOUR assessment of NIST's & Chandler's analyses. And then I'll provide mine.

But let's see you give your best shot at EXPLAINING what the following really are. Including numbers, where appropriate.
1. What are the comparative strengths & weaknesses of Chandler's & NIST's analyses?
2. What is the BEST estimate of the acceleration at NIST's 1.75 seconds?
3. What is the BEST estimate of the acceleration at NIST's 4.00 seconds?
4. What is the BEST estimate of the average acceleration between 1.75 & 4.0 seconds?
5. What is the BEST estimate of the peak acceleration between 1.75 & 4.0 seconds?
6. What is the BEST estimate of the time that the collapse really started.
7. Where did Chandler go wrong? Where did NIST go wrong?
Be sure to show your work, of course.

I'll give you my answers to questions 2 thru 6 right now.
2. 62% of G.
3. 82% of G.
4. 94% of G.
5. 99% of G.
6. 6.8 seconds (relative to East Penthouse collapse). (Not NIST's 6.9 seconds. Not Chandler's 7.9 seconds.)

So, now it's YOUR turn, Chris. Let's hear what you have to say.

tom

 

[tfk]

So you think NIST and Newton are delusional.

What you lack in honesty you more than make up for in chutzpah.

Would you consider an ex-rock & roll roadie and not bad bass player tossing insults to the experienced scientists & engineers here to fall into the category of "chutzpah", Chris?

Just curious...

tom

 

[Justin39640]

things are supposed to go slow when they are gravity driven and 80% of the support is gone??
lol

heres some more collapse models i made
(this is 2 collapses with the same structure)



this isnt gravity initiated (other than shoddy construction in the beginning) but its fun anyway



psikeyhackr eat your heart out lol

 

[Christopher7]

The point NIST picked moved down 7 feet in 1.75s. Then north west corner and west wall started moving. At that time "the entire building above the buckled-column region moved downward as a single unit"

emphasis mine. You seem to keep missing this part.

The north west corner did not move downward during that 1.75s. Read the post again. Look at the video I posted. The point NIST selected moves down but the north west corner does not during the 1.75s. The last wall to start moving was the west wall.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4853335#post4853335

 

[tsig]

Truthers in the main are intellectually dishonest, with the notable exceptions of Gregory Urich and Frank Greening.

Isn't the term for intellectually honest truther and "ex-truther"?

 

[tsig]

No it did not. Did you read this?

The point NIST picked moved down 7 feet in 1.75s. Then north west corner and west wall started moving. At that time "the entire building above the buckled-column region moved downward as a single unit"

David chandler used the north west corner. He established and NIST confirmed free fall acceleration starting when the north west corner started to fall.

NIST used a point at the top of the parapet wall on the roofline aligned with the east edge of the louvers* on the north face where the 'kink' developed. This area starts to descend before onset of global collapse as can be seen in this video:
*dark area in center of top 2 floors
http://nate.flach.s3.amazonaws.com/NIST_WTC7_video1.mov[FONT=&quot]

Left click and hold on the 'button' and slide it back and forth slowly starting with the beginning of the collapse of the screenwall thru the onset of global collapse. [north west corner and west wall start to fall - entire building falling][/FONT]

Quoting facts from different parts of the document [about the same thing] is necessary because NIST spread the facts out. Your suggesting that those quotes are not valid because they were "cherry picked" is intellectually dishonest.

So the report has truth in it, it's just spread around a bit?

 

[Justin39640]

So the report has truth in it, it's just spread around a bit?

kinda like the jigsaw puzzle?
except they use a 16 lb sledge hammer to make the pieces fit
lol

 

[Christopher7]

Can you admit that the north west corner of the roof went from not moving to free fall acceleration?

If your question implies that it did so instantly (say, in less than 1/4 second), then the correct answer is "No. Because it didn't do that."

Yes it did. David Chandler demonstrated free fall acceleration from the moment the north west corner started to fall. NIST confirmed Free fall acceleration using a different point that started moving downward before the point David used.

Look at the video:
http://nate.flach.s3.amazonaws.com/NIST_WTC7_video1.mov[FONT=&quot]
Left click and hold on the 'button' and slide it back and forth slowly to find when the point on the roofline above the east end of the louvers begins to fall. [/FONT]That point starts falling 1 to 2 seconds before the north west corner.

 

[Christopher7]

So the report has truth in it, it's just spread around a bit?

Correct

 

[tfk]

Can you admit that the north west corner of the roof went from not moving to free fall acceleration?
Yes it did. David Chandler demonstrated free fall acceleration from the moment the north west corner started to fall. NIST confirmed Free fall acceleration using a different point that started moving downward before the point David used.

Look at the video:
http://nate.flach.s3.amazonaws.com/NIST_WTC7_video1.mov[FONT=&quot]
Left click and hold on the 'button' and slide it back and forth slowly to find when the point on the roofline above the east end of the louvers begins to fall. [/FONT]That point starts falling 1 to 2 seconds before the north west corner.

Repeating baloney does not make it true.

Neither does writing it in big letters or in bold.

Chandler does not say what you think he says. Chandler is smart enough to know it. This is one of the few times where I think he's been intentionally deceptive in his choice of words, tho.

You, OTOH, are not informed enough or observant enough to know where you've screwed this particular pooch.

Provide your DETAILED ANALYSIS of Chandler's work.

Then I will show you - clearly & exactly - where Chandler blew it.

As a bonus, I'll show you why the dog is yelping...

tom

 

[Seymour Butz]

No it did not. Did you read this?

The point NIST picked moved down 7 feet in 1.75s. Then north west corner and west wall started moving. At that time "the entire building above the buckled-column region moved downward as a single unit"

David chandler used the north west corner. He established and NIST confirmed free fall acceleration starting when the north west corner started to fall.

NIST used a point at the top of the parapet wall on the roofline aligned with the east edge of the louvers* on the north face where the 'kink' developed. This area starts to descend before onset of global collapse as can be seen in this video:
*dark area in center of top 2 floors
http://nate.flach.s3.amazonaws.com/NIST_WTC7_video1.mov[FONT=&quot]

Left click and hold on the 'button' and slide it back and forth slowly starting with the beginning of the collapse of the screenwall thru the onset of global collapse. [north west corner and west wall start to fall - entire building falling][/FONT]

Quoting facts from different parts of the document [about the same thing] is necessary because NIST spread the facts out. Your suggesting that those quotes are not valid because they were "cherry picked" is intellectually dishonest.

This is evidence of only one thing:

That NIST never was and never has "covered up" for the inside jobby jobbers.

Chris has painted himself into a corner.

Only through a massive application of cognitive dissonance can trooferz STILL claim that NIST ever covered up anything in their original reports and then claim that this proves an inside job, and that they're part of it.

Of course, they may be just simple minded and/or trolls.

Take your pick....

 

[H'ethetheth]

Funny, I just watched this guy Chandler's video. He rants on about how NIST tries to hide all kinds of things. But strangely, his summary of what he really thinks happened (in terms of falling), is exactly what I get out of the NIST report. Also, what I get out of his method of analysis is that +/- 2% accuracy is probably generous.