Open Letter to Dave Thomas

[tfk]

deleted double post
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/02/10/article-1249885-083AA909000005DC-56_470x423.jpg

 

[Dave Rogers]

And why was no firefighting done?

WTC1's collapse severed the water main, so they didn't have enough water pressure to do anything useful.

Dave

 

[tfk]

Yup, yup.

Rigid bodies... gravity.... eccentric loads.... entirely gravity driven collapse...

In fact, this could just as easily be a building that was hit by an earthquake, couldn't it?

An earthquake...?

Sure thing.

An earthquake that ...

... knocks down one building, and then a 2nd 15 minutes later, and a 3rd 7 hours later.
... does not disturb the hundreds of nearby buildings.
... does not shake video cameras or people or car alarm motion sensors, but manages to topple huge buildings.
... [and most important] only effects 100+ story, burning buildings that have been recently hit by jetliners.

You aren't the slightest bit serious in any of these discussions.

Remember when I asked your age, and you declined to answer.
Don't bother. You've given me your answer.

Regardles of your chronological age, your "adult discussion age" is about 15. A very snarky, insincere 15.


tom

 

[T.A.M.]

If the damage was from WTC1, then there would have been several hours in which that gash would have been right there, gaping at everyone. No one caught an image of it? Surely there must be something in those 80 gigs of video.

I believe the reports of the firefighters. However, even in the few provided, there are contradictions. Most of them only speak about "corner" damage. No one mentions a long vertical hole the length of the building right smack in the middle of the south face. And only one mentions any significant fires. The interviews also were conducted well after the event, almost a year after.

On top of this, some corner damage is not going to cause the bldg to fall in the manner it did. If it causes any collapse, it would be a partial collapse or a leaning collapse in the direction of that damage.

And why was no firefighting done?

This is in part wrong. It will take me a little digging, but I recall vividly AT LEAST one firefighter describing a "20 STOREY LONG GASH".

TAM

 

[tfk]

What a stunning troll we have here.

If the damage was from WTC1, then there would have been several hours in which that gash would have been right there, gaping at everyone.

Except for the massive amount of smoke pouring out of the building from the fires.

No one caught an image of it?

100% wrong.
Uh, yeah they did.

Surely there must be something in those 80 gigs of video.

Uh, yes there was. Images of a massive gash.

I believe the reports of the firefighters.

… while denying what they say.

Hypocrite much?

However, even in the few provided, there are contradictions.

Ahhh, the twoofer milk & honey: "Every statement isn't EXACTLY identical. Inside Jobbity Job…!!"

Most of them only speak about "corner" damage.

Gee, "most of" the reporters only saw Princess Di drive away, not get killed in the car accident. That must mean that she didn't really get killed.

Pssst, troll, people talking about incident A constitutes zero proof that incident B did, or did not, happen.

Trollishly lame.

Try again.

No one mentions a long vertical hole the length of the building right smack in the middle of the south face.

Mislead by excessive qualification.

Many people explicitly described a long, deep vertical gash that ran thru many stories, very near the center of the south face.

BTW, NIST didn't model a "long vertical hole the length of the building right smack in the middle of the south face". NIST used all the video & photo info available to model the best, most accurate approximation to the actual damage that they could. Based on all the evidence that they had.

Unlike you, NIST engineers were honest.

And only one mentions any significant fires.

Outright, ludicrous, 100% wrong..

The interviews also were conducted well after the event, almost a year after.

100% wrong.

On top of this, some corner damage is not going to cause the bldg to fall in the manner it did.

Nobody said, implied, inferred, suggested, insinuated or intimated that it did.

Lame, trollish attempt at misdirection.

And why was no firefighting done?

Dead firefighters.
Possibly trapped victims.
The judgment that people are more important than buildings.
Nobody at risk.

Oh yeah. No water.

All of which you already know.

This is just a game to you, isn't it?

A rather cruel, disrespectful, pathetic game.

 

[twinstead]

A rather cruel, disrespectful, pathetic game.

They must have a school for conspiracy theorists, because ergo is a textbook one

 

[carlitos]

I remember that too.

From the comments section in this infamous article about Korey Rowe:

(snip)
Now, I don’t know if thios is true but I noticed that my statements are no longer posted. So I’ll go over it again. I was present at vicinity of BWY and Park Row when the secontower was hit. I was there at proximity to see the 20 floor gash in WTC 7. The WTC building was listing south about 20 degrees. Regarding my current status with the FDNY I am civil Defense volunteer not paid civil servant. We fall under the NYS Emergency Defense Act orf 1951. I am trained as watchstander FWD Sigint. I monitor NY/NJ/LI transpotation First Responder Communications as well as transportation and security networks. The FDNY is political as all other NYC agencies and has its ups and downs...

Sentinel
(snip)

ETA: I assume that in the quote above he means that he was present when the second tower collapsed, not when it was hit. In another comment on the same page he says

I was present at BWY and Park Row when the second tower collapsed. I ran from 42st back to the trade center. I passed the trade cented on my way to work on the N&R lines at courtland st (WTC) after the second tower S/T was reported by the passengers who rushed the train I was on.
I ran back because E10 L10 Liberty st was my former quarters 98-99. As I reached BWY & Park Row the second tower collapsed. I then made my way to the tower location after the cloud disapated and began with the bucket brigade. I had my scanner but there were problems coordinating full spectrum awareness on the scene. I was then transported to west st and w.houston to work with the above people around 1600hrs. I operated GZ/The pile/The pit for approx 3/4 weeks till the Volunteers were removed.

ETA - The quotes are from Paul Isaac Jr.

 

[T.A.M.]

If the damage was from WTC1, then there would have been several hours in which that gash would have been right there, gaping at everyone. No one caught an image of it? Surely there must be something in those 80 gigs of video.

I believe the reports of the firefighters. However, even in the few provided, there are contradictions. Most of them only speak about "corner" damage. No one mentions a long vertical hole the length of the building right smack in the middle of the south face. And only one mentions any significant fires. The interviews also were conducted well after the event, almost a year after.

On top of this, some corner damage is not going to cause the bldg to fall in the manner it did. If it causes any collapse, it would be a partial collapse or a leaning collapse in the direction of that damage.

And why was no firefighting done?

A little north of Vesey I said, we'll go down, let's see what's going on. A couple of the other officers and I were going to see what was going on. We were told to go to Greenwich and Vesey and see what's going on. So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn't look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn't look good.

http://www.firehouse.com/stateprovince/new-york/captain-chris-boyle

TAM

 

[cmatrix]

cmatrix,
A 47-story building collapsing in around 14 seconds ≠ "free fall," just FYI. A small portion of the building fell at free-fall acceleration for a couple of seconds, due to simple physical forces which have been explained in this thread.

If 'controlled demolition' explains free fall, could you please demonstrate a controlled demolition where free-fall acceleration was demonstrated?

Controlled demolitions don't require free fall. In fact it's quite expensive to have free fall in a CD. You have to blow out _all_ the structure in the way. Most CDs use gravity to help remove the resiting structure.

 

[alienentity]

No one caught an image of it?

Are you blind? You've already been shown images of it. Gee, you even acknowledged you've seen the images, so maybe you're just extremely forgetful

I believe the reports of the firefighters. However, even in the few provided, there are contradictions. Most of them only speak about "corner" damage. No one mentions a long vertical hole the length of the building right smack in the middle of the south face.

So if the gash was seen, but didn't run all the way up, that means it wasn't there? Am I understanding your logic correctly? Here's what was seen:

'Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered through there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post. – Capt. Chris Boyle'

'but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.'

And only one mentions any significant fires.

That's an outright lie.

It was fully engulfed, that whole building.
– Firefighter Tiernach Cassidy, FDNY


When I got out and onto a clear pile, I see that 7 World Trade Center and the customs house have serious fire. Almost every window has fire. It is an amazing site. –Captain Jay Jonas, Ladder 6, FDNY

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

7 World Trade was burning from the ground to the ceiling fully involved. It was unbelievable.
–Firefighter Steve Modica

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

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

It was fully engulfed, that whole building. There were pieces of tower two [sic: he probably means tower one] in building Seven and the corners of the building missing and what-not. But just looking up at it from ground level however many stories -- it was 40 some odd -- you could see the flames going straight through from one side of the building to the other, that’s an entire block.
– Firefighter Tiernach Cassidy, FDNY

We spoke to with a FDNY Chief who has his men holed up in the US Post Office building. He informed us that the fires in building 7 were uncontrollable and that its collapse was imminent. There were no fires inside the loading dock (of 7) at this time but we could hear explosions deep inside.
–Port Authority Police Department Officer William Connors

"There's number Seven World Trade. That's the OEM bunker." We had a snicker about that. We looked over, and it's engulfed in flames and starting to collapse."
–Firefighter Gerard Suden

The whole south side of Seven World Trade had been hit by the collapse of the second Tower, and there was fire on every floor."
– Fire Captain Brenda Berkman

"When I got out and onto a clear pile, I see that 7 World Trade Center and the customs house have serious fire. Almost every window has fire. It is an amazing site. –Captain Jay Jonas, Ladder 6, FDNY

7 World Trade was burning from the ground to the ceiling fully involved. It was unbelievable.
–Firefighter Steve Modica

So I attempted to get in through the Barkley Street ramp which is on Barkley (sic) and West Broadway, but I was being held back by the fire department, because 7 World Trade, which is above the ramp, was now fully engulfed.
–PAPD K-9 Sergeant David Lim

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

Just when you thought it was over, you're walking by this building and you're hearing this building creak and fully involved in flames. It's like, is it coming down next? Sure enough, about a half an hour later it came down.
–FDNY Lieutenant James McGlynn

On top of this, some corner damage is not going to cause the bldg to fall in the manner it did.

Nobody is making that claim, so you can argue against it all day.

And why was no firefighting done?

'I think they said they had seven to ten floors that were freestanding and they weren't going to send anyone in. –FDNY Chief Thomas McCarthy'

'Butch Brandeis came running up. He said forget it, nobody’s going into 7, there’s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned.' Boyle

'Captain Varriale told Chief Coloe and myself that 7 World Trade Center was badly damaged on the south side and definitely in danger of collapse. Chief Coloe said we were going to evacuate the collapse zone around 7 World Trade Center, which we did. – FDNY Lieutenant Rudolph Weindler'

'There was no hydrant pressure.' Boyle

So you're wondering why they didn't fight the fire? Do we need to explain that the building was not considered safe, there was no hydrant pressure, and they'd just lost 300+ men in the WTC tower collapses?
Apparently we do. That's very sad, 9 years after the event. How long does it take to learn the facts?

ETA source

 

[cmatrix]

Oh my,

No. If in any matter related to science, a group of experienced experts in the field in question used appropriate and applicable science, used avaiable evidence to back up a theory, and that theory fit the available evidence, both circumstantial and other, AND if no other theory provided a bettter explanation of the events or fit the avaiable evidence better, then i would accept that theory as the authority and best explanatory theory of the event or issue in question.

Why is this so hard for you to get your head around?

TAM

OK since the NIST theory does not explain the free fall period, the crimp or the rolling but the CD theory does, you must agree the CD theory is the best theory.

 

[alienentity]

Controlled demolitions don't require free fall. In fact it's quite expensive to have free fall in a CD. You have to blow out _all_ the structure in the way. Most CDs use gravity to help remove the resiting structure.

Please tell that to Richard Gage

 

[cmatrix]

This is complete and utter nonsense.

The only time an object will "use up" (or convert to kinetic energy) all the _available_ gravitational potential energy is when it hits the ground, or wherever you've defined your zero point.

Gravitational potential energy is a function of height. That's it.

ROFL The kinetic energy of an object is the energy which it possesses due to its motion. You think when an object's fall is completely resisted it's in motion and has kinetic energy?

 

[carlitos]

Controlled demolitions don't require free fall. In fact it's quite expensive to have free fall in a CD. You have to blow out _all_ the structure in the way. Most CDs use gravity to help remove the resiting structure.

OK, I'm a little slow.

A - "Controlled demolitions don't require free fall."
B - "Most CDs use gravity to help remove the resisting structure."
C - "...the 58 perimeter columns and 25 massive core columns of WTC 7 to be effectively removed simultaneously floor by floor so that the building was able to free fall straight down symmetrically for at least 2.25 seconds."

Can someone walk me through this logic? C does not appear to follow from A and B. Was the demolition of the Salomon Brothers building a "controlled demolition" specifically because it doesn't look like one?

Also, the highlighted portion of C is erroneous, but that's already been pointed out before.

 

[cmatrix]

Wrong. There is NO CONFLICT between the NIST report and the brief portion of the fallof the north side of the building that matched free fall speed/time.

TAM

NIST provides absolutely no explanation for the free fall whatsoever, just a pronouncement meant to be taken on faith by the scientifically illiterate and the gullible. The CD theory explains the crimp, the rolling and the free fall so it is the theory that should be accepted.

 

[alienentity]

OK since the NIST theory does not explain the free fall period, the crimp or the rolling but the CD theory does, you must agree the CD theory is the best theory.

Except that you are again wrong; the NIST theory does explain the freefall period. Your point is a strawman (of course)
Here is one such explanation, there are others..

'Chapter 12, NCSTAR 1-9 Vol2 p.602

'In Stage 1, the descent was slow and the acceleration was less than that of gravity. *This stage
corresponds to the initial buckling of the exterior columns in the lower stories of the north
face, as seen in Figure 12–62*. By 1.75 s, the north face had descended approximately 7 ft.

In Stage 2, the north face descended at gravitational acceleration, *as exterior column buckling
progressed and the columns provided negligible support to the upper portion of the north
face. * This free fall drop continued for approximately 8 stories (105 ft), the distance traveled
between times t = 1.75 s and t = 4.0 s

In Stage 3, the acceleration decreased somewhat as the *upper portion of the north face
encountered resistance from the collapsed structure and the debris pile below*. Between 4.0 s
and 5.4 s, the northwest corner fell an additional 130 ft. ''

 

[alienentity]

NIST provides absolutely no explanation for the free fall whatsoever,..

Completely false. See above. Stop lying, please, it's annoying and stupid.

 

[alienentity]

Here's another clear piece of evidence to address the latest lie of cmatrix (his false claim that NIST provides 'absolutely no explanation for the free fall whatsoever')

'NCSTAR 1-9, p 612 Chapter 14 Global Collapse, it states:

The exterior columns buckled at the lower floors (between floors 7 and 14) due to load redistribution to the exterior columns from the downward movement of the building core. The entire building above the buckled-column region then moved downward in a single unit, as observed, completing the global collapse sequence.


And on p 606
'As the interior columns buckled at the lower floors and the corresponding upper column sections began to move downward, the exterior columns buckled inward at the lower floors as a result of floor pull-in forces caused by the downward movement of the building core. The floor connections to the columns had not yet failed in this region, as there were no fires observed on the West side of Floors 19 through 14 at any time during the day, so the floors were intact and able to pull the exterior columns inward.'

This is an engineering explanation for the collapse and of course the 2.25 s at virtual free fall acceleration. As C7 did months ago, cmatrix has received the answer, but will likely refuse to accept it. I expect him to either ignore the answer, handwave it away, move the goalposts and change the subject...

 

[cmatrix]

And yet, not one person can provide a complete report on it. Very extensive.

I'm sure a group could produce a report if they had the millions of taxpayers dollars that were given to NIST as well as complete access to all the evidence and subpoena power. Do you seriously think the US govt. is going to fund a report that shows a group of powerful psychopathic terrorists have infiltrated every aspect of the US government and basically control the media?

 

[carlitos]

a group of powerful psychopathic terrorists have infiltrated every aspect of the US government and basically control the media?

This is just straight-up paranoia. You should print out this post and bring it to a mental health professional.