• 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.

Controlled demolition vs. the towers collapsing

Java Man said:
As reference material while the investigation was going on. Thus to better trim the computer simulations.

For themselves should they happen to need it. Which it was since the reports came to some conclusions which could have been better supported had the key beams been kept. But since they didn't know which were the key beams when they shipped it all alway they should have kept them until they finished the report. It's not like the steel was going to rust away.

Once again, at least until the investigation was officially over and the final report handed it.

Complained? Mhh not sure if any. But certainly many would have benefited from having it retained for investigative purpose. Certainly the Debunkers would have benefited as a thorough investigation with the evidence at hand would have prevented the Truther mayhem we have today.

Sure, why not? A few key pieces could be kept. Actually the pieces which were by then known to be key. Not just some random 5% sample.
Click to expand...

Can you specify which buildings beams? Are you talking about the WTC towers' beams, or 7WTC's beams.

Thanks.
 
triforcharity said:
Can you specify which buildings beams? Are you talking about the WTC towers' beams, or 7WTC's beams.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

The famous column that started it all in WTC7 could be a good start. From there I guess we could list the fire affected beams in the impacted floors on WTC 1 and 2 and work from there.

I'm glad to have made such a long lasting impression on you and your profile :)
 
Java Man said:
The famous column that started it all in WTC7 could be a good start. From there I guess we could list the fire affected beams in the impacted floors on WTC 1 and 2 and work from there.

I'm glad to have made such a long lasting impression on you and your profile :)
Click to expand...

Do we know if column 79 has or hasn't been found and kept?
 
Java Man said:
The famous column that started it all in WTC7 could be a good start. From there I guess we could list the fire affected beams in the impacted floors on WTC 1 and 2 and work from there.

I'm glad to have made such a long lasting impression on you and your profile :)
Click to expand...

Well, they could not identify conclusively which steel was from 7WTC, and what steel came from other buildings, so it is a moot point.

I am glad that you find it flattering that I make fun of you, in every single post. Awesome!!
 
triforcharity said:
Well, they could not identify conclusively which steel was from 7WTC, and what steel came from other buildings, so it is a moot point.

I am glad that you find it flattering that I make fun of you, in every single post. Awesome!!
Click to expand...

They couldn't identify conclusively?

"The engineers were able to identify many pieces by their markings. Each piece of steel was originally stenciled in white or yellow with information telling where it came from and where it was going. A sample of the markings can be seen in Figure D-5.

For example, a given piece might be marked, "PONYA WTC 213.00 236B4-9 558 35 TONS." Translated, this meant the column was destined for the Port of New York Authority's World Trade Center as part of contract number 213.00. Its actual piece number was 236B, and it was to be used between floors 4 and 9 in tower B (WTC 2). Its derrick division number was 558, which determined which crane would lift it onto the building and the order in which it was to be erected. Other markings might include the name of the iron works or shipping instructions to those responsible for railway transportation (Gillespie 1999). "

http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/WTC_apndxD.htm

Now the link comes from a Truther site. I hope that doesn't make the claim wrong. I mean the claim that each piece could be positively identified. I hope you don't fall into the old debunker tactic of arguing in circles.

Which brings me back to your quote. Which rather than make fun of me on every post just restates my position. Just because you're defending the right position doesn't automatically make your arguments correct. For example this absurd claim that they can't identify the beams, as if they were not marked in the first place.

Of course you also happen to conveniently put my statement out of its original context. Another typical debunker strategy. And last but not least "argumentum ad hominem" on your own words by making fun of me rather than countering my arguments.

How can a simple quote of my words say so much about you.
 
excaza said:
That's quite an assumption. Where did he say that?
Click to expand...

To quote him "Well, they could not identify conclusively which steel was from 7WTC, and what steel came from other buildings, so it is a moot point. "

The only way that could happen was if all markings were gone. Which was not the case. Thus debris could be identifiable.
 
So every single piece of steel was intact, and therefore, marked? None of it was damaged in any way that could possibly have removed the marking or broken apart the beams.

Ok.
 
Hi,

I believe the WTC towers were designed to collapse like they did into their own footprints in the case of a severe earthquake for safety reasons. To have high buildings like that falling sideways would cause much more damage. And having a very high building risk falling sideways several days (or even longer) after an earthquake would be dangerous.
 
Java Man,

Ok, so despite the ridiculousness of saving 50,000 feet of building steel for years on end, let's say one of the investigative agencies (fbi, fema, nist) wanted this.

1. Has the truth movement asked these agencies if they requested that such a thing be done, and if they did and it was refused, then by who and why?

2. Did you realize that the investigations didn't start in some cases for months after the collapses.

TAM:)
 
Anders Lindman said:
Hi,

I believe the WTC towers were designed to collapse like they did into their own footprints in the case of a severe earthquake for safety reasons. To have high buildings like that falling sideways would cause much more damage. And having a very high building risk falling sideways several days (or even longer) after an earthquake would be dangerous.
Click to expand...

1.) The towers did not fall in their own footprints.

2.) No building is designed to withstand an earthquake by collapsing in its own footprint. They're designed to withstand earthquakes by flexing, not falling over.
 
Java Man said:
To quote him "Well, they could not identify conclusively which steel was from 7WTC, and what steel came from other buildings, so it is a moot point. "

The only way that could happen was if all markings were gone. Which was not the case. Thus debris could be identifiable.
Click to expand...

For WTC1/2, yes.

WTC7 had gone through so many renovations that the steel was mostly unidentifiable and there was apparently no current set of blueprints available.
 
excaza said:
So every single piece of steel was intact, and therefore, marked? None of it was damaged in any way that could possibly have removed the marking or broken apart the beams.

Ok.
Click to expand...

Well surely some marks could have been damaged or removed, but that's a long shot from making it all "unidentifiable".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom