9-11 Facts Movement

[Grizzly Bear]

Tell us about it. You can use this as a reference.

So, what you're implying is that this building is a direct comparison to all three of the towers. You're one of those researchers that believes it is below him to do a case study investigating the differences in between his example and the comparable he wants to draw the analogy with. See, when we architecture students do a case study doing research half-assedly doesn't earn a grade, our instructors like the work finished... as does any student doing such a study that wants to present credible findings. Or is stopping behind the half-way mark of the study your intention to obfuscate your lack of technical knowledge on what your discussing? :rolleyes

 

[PhantomWolf]

Maybe ergo needs to consider what fire did to the steel Madrid Windsor Tower. Of course the likely hood is that he'd totally ignore what happened to the steel and focus on what didn't happen to the concrete without considering that the WTC didn't have concrete in the cores to hold it up.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

No, he needs to be asking more questions than whether the building collapsed or not. The day they move beyond that stage will be day I see pigs flapping wings in the wind....

 

[PhantomWolf]

No, he needs to be asking more questions than whether the building collapsed or not. The day they move beyond that stage will be day I see pigs flapping wings in the wind....

Well that is the Truth Movement. Forever asking questions. Forever ignoring answers.

 

[dc1971]

The fix you find yourself in is that since no steel framed high rise has ever collapsed due to fire, your argument that WTC 7 was fully expected to collapse is specious.

The fix YOU find YOURSELF in, oh non-expert of architecture, is that this has already been explained, and debunked and debunked again. Yes, there have been structures that have collapsed due to fire. And with any high rise structure put under the circumstance of being rammed with a jet plane, then having fire spread over several foors of that building would eventually result in such a collapse!

Isn't this argument getting old? Talk about Punk rock like I'm doing over at the Music sub-forum or something!!

 

[RedIbis]

The fix YOU find YOURSELF in, oh non-expert of architecture, is that this has already been explained, and debunked and debunked again. Yes, there have been structures that have collapsed due to fire. And with any high rise structure put under the circumstance of being rammed with a jet plane, then having fire spread over several foors of that building would eventually result in such a collapse!

Isn't this argument getting old? Talk about Punk rock like I'm doing over at the Music sub-forum or something!!

Why? I like the Ramones and some of the earlier punk, but it's not what I'm into.

The rest of your post is just bare assertion.

 

[beachnut]

Why? I like the Ramones and some of the earlier punk, but it's not what I'm into.

The rest of your post is just bare assertion.

Why do you insist on summarizing all your facts on 911 in one post?

If you were not obsessed with Gravy you might grasp 911.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

First time in history is a blanket claim asserting that anything that surpasses a threshold that has never been exceeded is impossible. It's not even considered an argument, which is why I find it ironic that we're being chastised for not doing enough research when individuals like red, and ergo rear right back and do the exact thing they're criticizing their peers for.

 

[dc1971]

Why? I like the Ramones and some of the earlier punk, but it's not what I'm into.

The rest of your post is just bare assertion.

In other words... talk about SOMETHING ELSE!

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Your movement has provided no evidence of such. Your claims are unsupported, unless you intend to leave it at the theatre whose roof caved in, and a shoddily built, four-storey Thai sweatshop catching on fire, the details of which you have not provided.

If these are your examples, I would suggest you find some better ones, because these just make you look silly.

There is no visual evidence of raging fires beyond short-lived portions of a couple of floors in WTC7. Your claims are unsupported.

WTC1 had fires on at least 10 floors simultaneously as can be seen in the photos from the Police helicopter.

The Top half of the Windsor building completely collapsed apart from its Concrete protected core.
Curious as to why you think a building being tall would provide any protection from collapse due to fire. Once a column reaches a temperature that softens the steel, the height of the building becomes a liability not an asset.
The aircraft impact removed many of the columns and damaged many of the floors that were required to keep the remaining columns from buckling. The fire got to enough of the remaining floor and columns (which were only poorly protected against fire at best at after the impact not at all so) and the buildings came down.

wheres the mystery?

 

[sheeplesnshills]

And with any high rise structure put under the circumstance of being rammed with a jet plane, then having fire spread over several foors of that building would eventually result in such a collapse!

Not strictly true. There were factors in the design and construction of the WTC Towers that made them particularly vulnerable.

The use of better fireproofing methods, better distribution of the Fire mains, better attachment of the floors and interlocking of the exterior columns would have given the building a better chance of survival. However they would have and in fact did survive a conventional office fire and survived long enough on 911 to let most occupants escape. In hindsight they should have been designed differently but hindsight is always 20-20.

 

[RedIbis]

In other words... talk about SOMETHING ELSE!

In this sub-forum that would be 9/11, not music.

 

[triforcharity]

Who says it could never have happened? The fix you find yourself in is that since no steel framed high rise has ever collapsed due to fire, your argument that WTC 7 was fully expected to collapse is specious.

Mix in the fact that NIST used no physical evidence when modeling the collapse mechanism and you have an argument based on faith.

So, all the firemen on the scene were psychic?

Please.

Fire has been known to affect steel framed buildings of all sizes for many years.

 

[triforcharity]

Right, because steel framed high rise fires are so very rare.

That have also suffered from an impact from another building, and allowed to burn for 7 hours without a drop of water, yes, very rare indeed.

 

[triforcharity]

Ok, just list for me the firefighters who were in the bldg and could see with their own eyes that column 79 had lost its lateral support, causing it to collapse and leading to the collapse of the entire bldg. Otherwise, they were speculating. Some that the fire could be brought under control, some that the bldg was fully involved in fire and would collapse.

They didn't have to know exactly HOW it collapsed, just that they saw the signs of collapse (bulging sides, leaning, sounds of failing floors, etc) and recognized it, most likely saving more lives.

 

[triforcharity]

Tell us about it. You can use this as a reference.

You do realize that this destroys your argument, right?

See page 9, 22, 27, and 105.

 

[stokes234]

Perhaps we should start employing 9/11 truthers as architects and structural engineers, since they apparently know how to build skyscrapers that can withstand aircraft collisions and ensuing infernoes.

 

[tsig]

Ok, just list for me the firefighters who were in the bldg and could see with their own eyes that column 79 had lost its lateral support, causing it to collapse and leading to the collapse of the entire bldg. Otherwise, they were speculating. Some that the fire could be brought under control, some that the bldg was fully involved in fire and would collapse.

Anyone who saw the column collapse would be dead.

 

[BigAl]

Ok, just list for me the firefighters who were in the bldg and could see with their own eyes that column 79 had lost its lateral support, causing it to collapse and leading to the collapse of the entire bldg. Otherwise, they were speculating. Some that the fire could be brought under control, some that the bldg was fully involved in fire and would collapse.

Who said the fire could be brought under control? Lets see the full transcript.

40+ firemen that report fire and damage to WTC7. You can find their names and full-text transcripts via the links, below. 40 is most of the firemen working the WTC7 Fire, no firemen contradict these reports.

41 firemen mention severity of fire in WTC7
29 firemen mention damage to WTC7
31 firemen predict collapse​

Summary spreadsheet names & statements: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...sg=AFQjCNGds_AjhkwP4V4RW9zTNH4GK3QezQ&cad=rja
Full text transcripts for those names: http://graphics8.nytimes.compackage...12_WTC_GRAPHICmet_WTC_histories_full_01.html

 

[Sabretooth]

Perhaps we should start employing 9/11 truthers as architects and structural engineers, since they apparently know how to build skyscrapers that can withstand aircraft collisions and ensuing infernoes.

Bad idea...unless you like your buildings constructed of pizza boxes and paper trays?