• 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.

Hardfire: Szamboti / Chandler / Mackey

vinniem said:
No, the size of wtc7's fires are very relevant. Debunkers like to throw around claims that it was such a huge office fire to back up the NIST hypothesis.

The fires in wtc7 were not the biggest office fires in history. That is a lie.
Click to expand...

Weren't they next door about an hour or so prior to 7 catching fire? (volume of fire vs time)

It was a fire
It was not fought
that makes things fall down.

The Madrid hotel took 24 hours to burn before partial collapse. That one started in one room. Not on four or more, one acre floors all at once. Also, another building didn't fall on it.
 
RedIbis said:
You think the WTC 7 fire was the largest office building fire in history?
Click to expand...

We walked over by number Seven World Trade Center as it was burning and saw this 40-plus story building with fire on nearly all floors. –FDNY Lieutenant Robert Larocco

I walked out and I got to Vesey and West, where I reported to Frank [Cruthers]. He said, we’re moving the command post over this way, that building’s coming down. At this point, the fire was going virtually on every floor, heavy fire and smoke that really wasn’t bothering us when we were searching because it was being pushed southeast and we were a little bit west of that. I remember standing just where West and Vesey start to rise toward the entrance we were using in the World Financial Center. There were a couple of guys standing with me and a couple of guys right at the intersection, and we were trying to back them up – and here goes 7. It started to come down and now people were starting to run. –FDNY Deputy Chief Nick Visconti

When the building came down it was completely involved in fire, all forty-seven stories.
–FDNY Assistant Chief Harry Myers


I reposted this again because it's easy, just copy and paste. But Redibis thinks that the firefighters were part of the conspiracy, he isn't going to pay any attention to what they say.
 
Last edited:
vinniem said:
No, the size of wtc7's fires are very relevant. Debunkers like to throw around claims that it was such a huge office fire to back up the NIST hypothesis.
Click to expand...

Not just limited to you, but what would someone like yourself call a large fire? What criteria determines the classification of "large"?

Would one fully involved floor out of a 47 story building be considered "small" in your opinion? What about one out of 110 floors? How about a flash ignition of about 6 floors In a building with 50+ floors?

Where do you draw the line of "big"? Just curious... 'cause in a large office building with floor area almost equal to a foot ball field in size on fire along with a few floor above seems to me like a devilish take to fight on its own.
 
Sword_Of_Truth said:
We walked over by number Seven World Trade Center as it was burning and saw this 40-plus story building with fire on nearly all floors. –FDNY Lieutenant Robert Larocco

I walked out and I got to Vesey and West, where I reported to Frank [Cruthers]. He said, we’re moving the command post over this way, that building’s coming down. At this point, the fire was going virtually on every floor, heavy fire and smoke that really wasn’t bothering us when we were searching because it was being pushed southeast and we were a little bit west of that. I remember standing just where West and Vesey start to rise toward the entrance we were using in the World Financial Center. There were a couple of guys standing with me and a couple of guys right at the intersection, and we were trying to back them up – and here goes 7. It started to come down and now people were starting to run. –FDNY Deputy Chief Nick Visconti

When the building came down it was completely involved in fire, all forty-seven stories.
–FDNY Assistant Chief Harry Myers


I reposted this again because it's easy, just copy and paste. But Redibis thinks that the firefighters were part of the conspiracy, he isn't going to pay any attention to what they say.
Click to expand...

Does NIST agree with Myers' statement that the bldg was "completely involved" or Larocco's description of "fire on nearly all floors"?

Do you agree with those statements? Or do you think it's possible that in the extreme drama and emotion of that moment, their memory might be exaggerating the details of what actually occurred?
 
Grizzly Bear said:
Not just limited to you, but what would someone like yourself call a large fire? What criteria determines the classification of "large"?

Would one fully involved floor out of a 47 story building be considered "small" in your opinion? What about one out of 110 floors? How about a flash ignition of about 6 floors In a building with 50+ floors?

Where do you draw the line of "big"? Just curious... 'cause in a large office building with floor area almost equal to a foot ball field in size on fire along with a few floor above seems to me like a devilish take to fight on its own.
Click to expand...

Do you really need this explaining to you? I will do it in pictures to help you understand. Thie first one is a large fire:
 

Attachments

  • 090209top9.jpg
    090209top9.jpg
    21.6 KB · Views: 0
  • 090209top3.jpg
    090209top3.jpg
    59.5 KB · Views: 0
vinniem said:
Do you really need this explaining to you? I will do it in pictures to help you understand. Thie first one is a large fire:
Click to expand...

1. How big is the Windsor tower?

2. Why do you only show that one picture of WTC7 when that's deceptive since that's surely early on in the day and on the north side? WTC7 took up the size of a city block, so when you see flames on the north side that's actually means fires have moved across a whole block!
 
Last edited:
vinniem said:
Do you really need this explaining to you? I will do it in pictures to help you understand. Thie first one is a large fire:
Click to expand...

Any idiot can pick a picture that doesn't show something. You picked an unrepresentative picture of WTC7. Besides, a video does a much better job of showing how big a fire is. Here are several;

9/11/01 LIVE! News/Amateur Video World Trade Center Part 4
http://youtube.com/watch?v=DpAHh-yT25Q
WTC7 on fire at 0:44 1:10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Afb7eUHr64U
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/WTC7_Fire_Videos

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1LetB0z8_o
 
BigAl said:
9/11/01 LIVE! News/Amateur Video World Trade Center Part 4
http://youtube.com/watch?v=DpAHh-yT25Q
WTC7 on fire at 0:44 1:10
Click to expand...


I also notice straight after 1:10 clip of 7 on fire the firefighter telling another that "WHEN" 7 goes its going to create a large dust cloud and they wont be able to breath... I guess vinniem thinks him and all the other firefighters that thought it was coming down are in on the coverup.
 
Edx said:
I also notice straight after 1:10 clip of 7 on fire the firefighter telling another that "WHEN" 7 goes its going to create a large dust cloud and they wont be able to breath... I guess vinniem thinks him and all the other firefighters that thought it was coming down are in on the coverup.
Click to expand...

It isn't the truth movement that calls firefighters liars.

Tell me, how do you feel about John Schroder and the firefighter who claims he found the black boxes?
 
vinniem said:
It isn't the truth movement that calls firefighters liars.

Tell me, how do you feel about John Schroder and the firefighter who claims he found the black boxes?
Click to expand...

Oh look you didn't answer any of my questions and you ignored what people have said about John Schroder earlier.

How predictable.
 
DAMN YOU SAM.I.AM!!! You seem to beat me EVERY SINGLE TIME!!!

It must be that damn submarine you got's yourself.
 
vinniem said:
Do you really need this explaining to you? I will do it in pictures to help you understand. Thie first one is a large fire:
Click to expand...
911 truth always posts the night fires; wowzer

Off topic as is me, you are not too good at this truth stuff, so far all you can do is barely repeat old lies, but mostly talk about nothing.
 
Sam.I.Am said:
The steel portion of the Windsor fire collapsed pretty early on.
Click to expand...

The Windsor is a superb example of what happens to steel in a fire.

Actually, only some of the steel collapsed. Some survived. When the fire happened, they were in the midst of performing some upgrades, including adding insulation to the external steel columns. The core steel columns were already insulated by virtue of being embedded in concrete.

Since they were only partially finished the job, some of the external steel columns were insulated, and some were not.

In the very same fire:

ALL of the floors collapsed had uninsulated steel.
ALL of the floors that did not collapse had insulated steel.

A perfect experiment. A perfect demonstration.
[The Structural Fire Engineering program at UManchester is one of the finest in the world. They offer their considered opinions on both the Windsor Towers & WTC fires.]

http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/pr...Study/HistoricFires/BuildingFires/default.htm

UManchester Case Study said:
The building was subjected to a three year refurbishment programme of works when the fire broke out. The major works included the installations of:

  • Fire protection to the perimeter steel columns using a boarding system
  • Fire protection to the internal steel beams using a spray protection
  • A sprinkler system
  • A new aluminium cladding system
The refurbishment was carried out floor-by-floor from the lower floors upwards. By the time the fire broke out, the fire protection for all steelwork below the 17th floor had been completed except a proportion of the 9th and 15th floors.
...
A large portion of the floor slabs above the 17th Floor progressively collapsed during the fire when the unprotected steel perimeter columns on the upper levels buckled and collapsed
...
The fire protection on the existing steelworks below the 17th floor had been completed at the time of fire except for the 9th and 15th floors. When the fire spread below the 17th floor, those protected perimeter columns survived, except for the unprotected columns at the 9th and 15th floors which all buckled in the multiple floor fire (see Figure 2). However, they did not cause any structural collapse. Obviously, the applied loads supported by these buckled columns had been redistributed to the remaining reinforced concrete shear walls. Nevertheless, structural fire analysis should be carried out before such a conclusion can be drawn.
Click to expand...

See the pattern?
Insulated steel survives.
Uninsulated steel collapses.
In the very same fire.

It always amuses me when truthers quote the Windsor Towers as evidence of some giant mystery compared to the WTC. When it really proves the exact opposite.


Tom

Lest anyone have any doubt as to these experts' opinions about the WTC, they also have an analysis of that event.

http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/pr...toricFires/BuildingFires/worldTradeCenter.htm
 
vinniem said:
Do you really need this explaining to you? I will do it in pictures to help you understand.
Click to expand...
Doesn't really work if you're selectively excluding images which provide a better measure. Tell me, how big of an interior fire is required to to give off a large volume of smoke; say... several floors?

http://www.911oz.com/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=340&stc=1&d=1258063359


vinniem said:
This first one is a large fire:
Click to expand...
So if Madrid was a large fire, and WTC 5 was a large fire can you tell me how you made the call that WTC 7 and this fire in the WTC are "small" (preferably being more truthful).

Here's a comparison for you:

WTC5: http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/docs/wtc5_fire_floors.jpg

6 or seven floors, let's not forget that firefighters had easier access to this one since it wasn't more than 800 ft in the air inside a skyscraper.

WTC 1 soon before collapse: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_rLV-ZuNPw...TlEKQ/s400/NorthTowerFireGJS-WTC27cropped.jpg

How many floors do you see on fire there? At an acre per floor would that count as small too?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom