• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

'What about building 7'?

Status
Not open for further replies.
cooperman said:
Ae911truth have noticed. The clue is in their name. They have engineers.

You could spot the fabrication too if you actually read it. I made it even easer for you be posting the fire simulation picture.
Click to expand...

What are the qualifications, experience and expertise of these Engineers?
Are they relevant to the field?

If you are going to hold them up as an authority you have to show that they are an authority.
 
cooperman said:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=122220

Why am I even surprised that you haven't read it?

In view of the fact that NIST appears to have overestimated the intensity and duration of the fires in WTC 7, particularly on floors 12 and 13, it follows that the heating of the structural steel is also overestimated in the WTC 7 Draft Report.
Click to expand...

His concerns include what I am arguing here.

Heres a sample
Click to expand...

The draft report and papers that cite it are obsolete and irrelevant.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
What are the qualifications, experience and expertise of these Engineers?
Are they relevant to the field?

If you are going to hold them up as an authority you have to show that they are an authority.
Click to expand...

Keep up. They don't need to be an authority. The NIST fire analysis does not match reality. You only need eyes and a lack of religious belief to spot it.

I have made no appeals to authority. You guys are the ones telling me I must be an engineer.
 
cooperman said:
Keep up. They don't need to be an authority. The NIST fire analysis does not match reality. You only need eyes and a lack of religious belief to spot it.
Click to expand...

Why do you doubt the professional opinions of the many eyewitness that do have relevant expertise and first-hand knowledge of how WTC7 collapsed? These people say it was fire. There are no eyewitnesses that say that anything but unfought fire was the reason for the collapse.
 
cooperman said:
Keep up. They don't need to be an authority. The NIST fire analysis does not match reality. You only need eyes and a lack of religious belief to spot it.

I have made no appeals to authority. You guys are the ones telling me I must be an engineer.
Click to expand...
Chris Sarns made up the fire charts. Out of the blue. The not near reality stuff is what Gage pushes.

No reality based engineers would sign up for Gage's lies club.

Gage's group has failed to publish anything! It is a fraud to support Gage!

You were fooled by Gage and his group of followers who have idiotic ideas on 911. They fooled you and you don't care, you keep supporting their failure based on nothing.

Don't need but a grade school education to see Gage is a fraud.
 
BigAl said:
Why do you doubt the professional opinions of the many eyewitness that do have relevant expertise and first-hand knowledge of how WTC7 collapsed? These people say it was fire. There are no eyewitnesses that say that anything but unfought fire was the reason for the collapse.
Click to expand...

The NIST collapse initiation theory has nothing to do with eyewitnesses.
 
Well, since certain people are trying to hide from their mistakes about One Meridian...


Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my understanding that there does not need to be any fire near column 79 when it fails in order for it to fail. All that needs to happen is for there to be lateral movement of the connecting trusses which could be caused by either the thermal expansion or reduction.

Cooperman and folks, you have all avoided this question, but do any of you understand what happens to a constrained steel truss that is first superheated then cooled?
 
Travis said:
Well, since certain people are trying to hide from their mistakes about One Meridian...


Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my understanding that there does not need to be any fire near column 79 when it fails in order for it to fail. All that needs to happen is for there to be lateral movement of the connecting trusses which could be caused by either the thermal expansion or reduction.

Cooperman and folks, you have all avoided this question, but do any of you understand what happens to a constrained steel truss that is first superheated then cooled?
Click to expand...
Good luck with this. I asked this yesterday and he avoided the question like the plague.
 
cooperman said:
The NIST collapse initiation theory has nothing to do with eyewitnesses.
Click to expand...

Why do you doubt the professional opinions of the many eyewitness that have relevant expertise and first-hand knowledge of how WTC7 collapsed? These people say it was fire. There are no eyewitnesses that say that anything but unfought fire was the reason for the collapse.
 
cooperman said:
Such as?
Click to expand...

I dunno, maybe this

1. Heat on numerous floors, led to expansion of the steel in many locations, especially on floors 8-14.
2. This expansion (and contraction) lead to a combination of weakening and sheering forces, that caused BREAKAGE of the connections etc...
3. These breakages led to the internal collapsing of numerous floors, but in particular a stretch of floors from the 13th down until the 5th floor.
4. The loss of these floors left column 79 unsupported for a span of 8-9 floors, which led to the buckling of column 79, which was the initiating event of the total collapse.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=6409136#post6409136
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom