Split Thread 7WTC - controlled demolition or fire and damage induced collapse?

[Disbelief]

So what has become of the Thermite/Thermate? Has that been abandoned now?

You didn't get the memo? It was explosive nanothermite with the exclusive Hushaboom technology!

 

[Gamolon]

[FONT=&quot]"a free fall time would be an object that has no structural components below it . . . . there was structural resistance that was provided in this particular case."

Questions.

1. What was his quoted answer in reference to? The entire viewable roofline collapse or just the 100ft? When he says "a free fall time", what is he referring to?

2. Are you saying that it is 100% impossible for ANY building to experience ANY amount of free fall EVER unless columns are physically removed by demolition?

3. Does a failed structural component equal a "removed" column is terms of providing no support?

 

[Christopher7]

What you fail to grasp is that "within a second" is not simultaneous. At least in the real world.

In the real world, "simultaneous" is somewhat subjective.
NIST L pg 33 [pdf pg 37]
The simultaneous failure of screenwall and west penthouse structures,
pg 34
Since the screenwall and west penthouse fell almost simultaneously

If the columns were "removed" as you claim

It is not a claim, it is a statement of physics. FFA means falling thru air - NO resistance. For this to happen to the top part of a building, all the supporting structure must be removed, leaving only air.

the FFA would have started immediately, not 1 second after the start of the exterior wall collapse.

Not so. You don't know what you are talking about.

In other words, if the columns were removed, how could they provide resistance for the first second?

In a building implosion, the interior columns are blown a little before the exterior columns. The floor connections then pull the exterior walls inward and downward as the core descends. The exterior columns started to buckle, the roof line moved downward a little, and then the exterior walls were removed on 7 to 8 floors to allow FFA.

I don't know what your world is like, but in the real world, the boom-boom is a part of every single CD by explosives that has ever been done.

Did it ever occur to you that this was not an ordinary CD?
Did it occur to you that they wanted it to sound like a "natural" collapse?
You do not know all there is to know about what can be done to minimize the sound.

 

[Miragememories]

On a side note, I was up very early this morning, and none other than CDI was actually taking down an old smokestack about 30 miles from where I was at. I heard the boom this morning, as I was driving to the beach. And they only used a small amount to notch the towers. Here is the article.

http://www.floridatoday.com/article...nt-smokestacks-topple-during-demolition-VIDEO

30 miles away, and I still heard it. Awesome, it really was.

But yet, people within EYESHOT of 7WTC didn't hear squat.

In effect, they set off demolitions at the base of a large cannon-like structure.

And you are surprised that the sound of this huge cannon was heard from 30 miles away?

It doesn't take much to impress you.

Shock 'n awesome.

MM

 

[excaza]

It is not a claim, it is a statement of physics. FFA means falling thru air - NO resistance. For this to happen to the top part of a building, all the supporting structure must be removed, leaving only air.

Still repeating this hoping eventually it'll come true?

In a building implosion, the interior columns are blown a little before the exterior columns. The floor connections then pull the exterior walls inward and downward as the core descends. The exterior columns started to buckle, the roof line moved downward a little, and then the exterior walls were removed on 7 to 8 floors to allow FFA.

But they purposely only did 7-8 floors, to do what? Mess with people? As an 'easter egg' for truthers?

 

[Christopher7]

More blatant stupidity on Chandlers part. Where he claims that the building hasn't fell at 4:13, there is a wall of dust traveling down the street.]

More blatant stupidity on Chandlers your part.
Please note that at 4:13 the screenwall and west penthouse have not collapsed yet. The collapse of the rest of the building didn't happen for until a couple seconds after that.

You do raise an interesting point. There is a great deal of smoke coming from the bottom floors on the north side just before the collapse. NIST does not mention these fires. Daryl [first year med student] mentioned that the bottom floors were on fire. That is the only report of the these fires that I know of.

 

[triforcharity]

In effect, they set off demolitions at the base of a large cannon-like structure.

And you are surprised that the sound of this huge cannon was heard from 30 miles away?

It doesn't take much to impress you.

Shock 'n awesome.

MM

Now, I could be wrong here, maybe one of the sound experts can correct me if I am wrong, but wouldn't that direct the blast noise upwards? Yes, I think it would. And yes, at 30 miles, I find that impressive.

But yet, supposedly, according to you and Chris, people less than 1 mile from 7WTC, didn't hear anything.......gee..........how amazing.....

 

[BigAl]

More blatant stupidity on Chandlers your part.
Please note that at 4:13 the screenwall and west penthouse have not collapsed yet. The collapse of the rest of the building didn't happen for until a couple seconds after that.

You do raise an interesting point. There is a great deal of smoke coming from the bottom floors on the north side just before the collapse. NIST does not mention these fires. Daryl [first year med student] mentioned that the bottom floors were on fire. That is the only report of the these fires that I know of.

Don't know much, do you.

About 100 firemen state clearly that WTC7 was damages by on fire and about to collapse beginning at about 2PM. Their names and full text transcripts are online via the following links.

41 firemen mention severity of fire in WTC7
29 firemen mention damage to WTC7
104 firemen mention pullback from WTC7
36 firemen mention "Pull" to mean withdraw from the building

Summary spreadsheet names & statements: http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/WTC7_Eyewitnesses.xls
Full text transcripts for those names: http://preview.tinyurl.com/36rak3
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packag...coop/cse?cx=016182179862191393560:hx2yxincxdu

 

[uke2se]

So, I go away for the weekend and nothing has changed. C7 is still pulling stuff out of his ass and shouting "DENIER" at anyone who calls him on the stupid things he manage to post. MM is still stuck between thermite/thermate/magic and explosives, attempting to handwave the lack of noise from explosives, like a person in high heels dancing over a cobblestone road.

I'd like to signal my return home (Scotland was lovely for the Scotsmen out there) by restating a question C7 has never answered:

If FFA = CD, why do no other CDs produce FFA?

 

[Sabretooth]

It was explosive nanothermite with the exclusive patented Hushaboom^TM technology!

FTFY. Don't wanna get sued, do ya?

 

[Grizzly Bear]

But yet, supposedly, according to you and Chris, people less than 1 mile from 7WTC, didn't hear anything.......gee..........how amazing.....

It's amazing considering these people claim the only explanation for launching columns out 500 ft maximum lateral distances is explosive devices which would require power far beyond that of any controlled demolition comparable, yet swiftly change to thermite when the lack of immensely loud explosions in all video recordings is discussed because it was "quieter" than regular CD's. Extremely powerful Hush-a-booms make an oxymoron

 

[Christopher7]

"a free fall time would be an object that has no structural components below it . . . . there was structural resistance that was provided in this particular case."

Questions.

1. What was his quoted answer in reference to? The entire viewable roofline collapse or just the 100ft? When he says "a free fall time", what is he referring to?

It is a general statement of physics that applies to falling objects. The "no structural components below it" obviously refers to the upper part of WTC 7 which fell as a single unit because he goes on to say there was structural resistance in this case. That was when he was saying that WTC 7 did not fall at FFA - before he had to admit that WTC 7 actually did fall at FFA.

2. Are you saying that it is 100% impossible for ANY building to experience ANY amount of free fall EVER unless columns are physically removed by demolition?

Many absolute qualifiers. No building can fall any significant distance at FFA without all the supporting structure being removed with explosives.

3. Does a failed structural component equal a "removed" column is terms of providing no support?

No, steel provides some resistance as it is failing and there are many columns so failing columns cannot result in FFA.

 

[excaza]

Many absolute qualifiers. No building can fall any significant distance at FFA without all the supporting structure being removed with explosives.

Oh, well because you say so, it must be true.

No, steel provides some resistance as it is failing and there are many columns so failing columns cannot result in FFA.

Oh, well because you say so, it must be true.

 

[uke2se]

Many absolute qualifiers. No building can fall any significant distance at FFA without all the supporting structure being removed with explosives.

First, how far can a building - or as is the case with WTC 7, part of a building - fall at FFA without all the supporting structure being removed with explosives?

Second, evidence?

 

[Miragememories]

"Some, for reasons unknown, still claim the building came straight down, which is false. The building fell to the south, if one looks closely at the videos. If the south side of the building fell first, would it not pull the north side with it? Several videos show this sequence."

What is your point?

That any controlled demolition less than perfect cannot be a controlled demolition?

A less than perfect controlled demolition.

MM

 

[excaza]

What is your point?

That any controlled demolition less than perfect cannot be a controlled demolition?

[qimg]http://img293.imageshack.us/img293/5007/fallenbuilding2je6.png[/qimg]
A less than perfect controlled demolition.

MM

Source stating that was CD? Not saying it wasn't, but I'd like to be sure. Plus the story would be interesting.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

http://stormwater.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/fallen-building1.jpg?w=450&h=303
Oh hey here's a building that fell over due to a deficiency in the foundation system.

News on it here: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2009-07/09/content_8401609.htm

Wait I forgot... structure only breaks if you blow it up.... C7 says so

 

[Miragememories]

"What you refuse to grasp is that I know the NIST version of the collapse progression. All the exterior columns all failed within a second of each other [NIST says 2 sec] allowing the upper portion to fall straight down for ~100 feet. Had the exterior columns not been removed on 7 to 8 floors simultaneously, the top part would not have fallen straight down. Something falling at FFA is falling absolutely straight down."

"What you fail to grasp is that "within a second" is not simultaneous. At least in the real world. If the columns were "removed" as you claim, the FFA would have started immediately, not 1 second after the start of the exterior wall collapse. In other words, if the columns were removed, how could they provide resistance for the first second?"

"His 8-storey, 600+ column CD would have to begin after collapse initiation, which is pretty funny when you stop to think about it."

Simultaneous=at the same time.

In terms of controlled demolitions, within 1 second would certainly constitute as being simultaneous.

In terms of clock accuracy, 1 second represents a minor degree of error.

The fundamental point here is that even the NIST is in agreement that for 2.25 seconds, WTC7, as a whole, dropped at freefall speed, through 8 stories of zero structural resistance.

What lapman and GlennB refuse to acknowledge, is that the initiation of a successful building implosion does not require the total simultaneous removal of all its columns.

A successful controlled demolition implosion requires the simultaneous balanced (centered) removal of a sufficient number of core columns so that the remaining intact columns are unable to carry the transferred weight of the building.

The center of the structure begins to fail marked by a visible roofline kink.

Overwhelmed by the even transfer of the total building weight, the exterior columns simultaneously fail, and the building as a whole will display a relatively symmetrical freefall descent.

It is totally illogical to not expect a brief delay between the core failure and the total column failure.

MM

 

[GlennB]

The fundamental point here is that even the NIST is in agreement that for 2.25 seconds, WTC7, as a whole, dropped at freefall speed, through 8 stories of zero structural resistance.

What lapman and GlennB refuse to acknowledge, is that the initiation of a successful building implosion does not require the total simultaneous removal of all its columns.

What you fail to notice (easily fixed by referring to the original posts) is that lapman and me were addressing C7's insane proposition that 600+ columns over 8 entire storeys were simultaneously removed - in a period of < 2 seconds - to generate FFA, while the building was already falling. This would be truly unique.

Along the way I think we mentioned that most of these would be external columns, placing hundreds of high explosive flashes and booms only inches from the outside world and creating an audio-visual experience never to be forgotten by those who witnessed it. Whoops ... nobody did.

 

[beachnut]

What is your point?

That any controlled demolition less than perfect cannot be a controlled demolition?

A less than perfect controlled demolition.

MM

A concrete reinforced structure. ? Where was the CD attempt made? Where is the story of this structure?

zero structural resistance.
MM

It means the entire building was falling and failing. Did you forget the penthouse fell through well before the facade began to fall? You still have failed to grasp the collapse. You CD delusion was debunked on 911. What core? Show us the core.