WTC7 and the NIST free fall failure

[DGM]

There are many of us who simply want questions answered, who do not assert the US government had a hand in it or allowed it to happen. This doesn't make us trolls...it makes us Thinkers. We simply have questions to which the answers inadequately respond. This says nothing of our sanity or gullibility.

So ask your questions. If you don't except the answers then it's in your court to explain why.

So........Use your words........what do you want to know?

 

[triforcharity]

Very approximately. You're talking about ground level

Is there another way to measure the HEIGHT of a building? Should I include the basement level in the HEIGHT??

Here is the EXACT height of 1WTC.
1368 ft (417.0 m)

And 7WTC.
741 ft (226 m)

Is that better for you femr? I am so sorry I did not give you the EXACT freaking measurements when I was ESTIMATING.

LOL. You don't know the value, and neither do I. Measure it.

I know that the value is not going to change much between 7WTC and Central Park. Again, it was an ESTIMATE.

Probably. Measure it, and then you can assert your original suggestion with confidence, rather than pointless posturing.

I would have to do more math, which could take months to get a conclusive, absolute, conclusion, and still would not be perfect.

From Central Park.

And how far is Central Park from 7WTC?

Sure...

Asking me where I got the 9m/s value from, and your subsequent exclamations...when you responded to achimspoks statement yourself...is why I'm saying your exclamations about it are nonsense

Well, I see. I do apologize, I should have remembered that.

(See how easy to admit that you made a mistake? You should try it sometime)

No. I am simply pointing out to you, repeatedly, that you don't know the wind speed at WTC7 at any particular time, and should measure it before stating it's Xm/s.

I have never stated any absolute measurements. Only you and Aschm have. I always have stated the 4mph figure, and showed where I got that value from.

Given the high probability of complex airflow effects I would suggest not bothering and simply say you're not sure about the wind speed, or direction.

Again, I was going with an ESTIMATE. Why do you not understand that? IS that why you have such a hard time with Dr. Bazant's papers?

 

[carlitos]

I know that the value is not going to change much between 7WTC and Central Park. Again, it was an ESTIMATE.

...

And how far is Central Park from 7WTC?

achimspok posted the wind speed at LaGuardia. Any thoughts?

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

Achimspok has written a whole webpage about WTC7:

http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911..._op=view_page&PAGE_id=88&MMN_position=219:219

Filled with YouTube videos @ other junk that's been debunked.

 

[femr2]

Is there another way to measure the HEIGHT of a building? Should I include the basement level in the HEIGHT??

Here is the EXACT height of 1WTC.
1368 ft (417.0 m)

And 7WTC.
741 ft (226 m)

Try the old building 7, not the new one.

Is that better for you femr?

Not really.

I am so sorry I did not give you the EXACT freaking measurements when I was ESTIMATING.

The right building would have been useful, but again, you're talking about ground level.

That's about 0ft (ish)

So, yeah, I did think you stating a WTC1 value ~70ft off and one for a different building was a bit odd

I know that the value is not going to change much between 7WTC and Central Park. Again, it was an ESTIMATE.

Achimspok posted another estimate.

About half his measurement up-top of WTC1, and double your Central Park estimate.

About half-way. Result

I have never stated any absolute measurements. Only you and Aschm have.

Incorrect. What values have I stated ?

I always have stated the 4mph figure, and showed where I got that value from.

Yeah. Central park.

Achimspok posted another estimate earlier that you may have missed...

~10mph.

 

[triforcharity]

achimspok posted the wind speed at LaGuardia. Any thoughts?

Well, lets use Google Earth to find the APpROXIMATE distances from 7WTC to Central Park, and 7WTC and LaGuardia airport. ( femr, I am using APPROXIMATE distances, as it is not EXACT, since I am using a general location, not an EXACT GPS coordinate. Figured I'd let you know, since you seem to not understand approximates)

From 7WTC to Central park is 4.2 miles. Approximately.

From 7WTC to LaGuardia Airport is approximately 7.8 miles.

I would say that given the location of LaGuardia airport's distance being almost 2x's the distance from 7WTC, I would say that the 4mph is substantially more accurate than the 20mph that Achimspok has calculated.

If that's accurate. Achimspok, is that accurate? Femr2, any thoughts?

 

[triforcharity]

Try the old building 7, not the new one.

Not really.

The right building would have been useful, but again, you're talking about ground level.

That's about 0ft (ish)

Oh darn, you got me again. The CORRECT figure for 7WTC would have been 610 feet (186 meters) tall.

You think that they measure the wind speed at 0 feet elevation? Laughable at best.

So, yeah, I did think you stating a WTC1 value ~70ft off and one for a different building was a bit odd

Do you not understand what APPROXIMATE is? That is what this "~" little symbol means.

Achimspok posted another estimate.

About half his measurement up-top of WTC1, and double your Central Park estimate.

About half-way. Result

So, he changed his measurement of the wind? Why?

Incorrect. What values have I stated ?

9m/s, which you REPEATED from femr2. Hence, you stated an exact value.

Yeah. Central park.

Which is closer than LaGuardia, and the closest accurate measurement I have. 4mph wind sustained, and 10 mph gusts, approximately.

Achimspok posted another estimate earlier that you may have missed...

~10mph.

Which would be pretty accurate IMO, given the height of 1WTC.

Now, do you think that the wind around 7WTC would have caused much smoke from 5WTC to be mixed with the smoke of 7WTC? If so, how much.

List any assumptions.

 

[achimspok]

Well, lets use Google Earth to find the APpROXIMATE distances from 7WTC to Central Park, and 7WTC and LaGuardia airport. ( femr, I am using APPROXIMATE distances, as it is not EXACT, since I am using a general location, not an EXACT GPS coordinate. Figured I'd let you know, since you seem to not understand approximates)

From 7WTC to Central park is 4.2 miles. Approximately.

From 7WTC to LaGuardia Airport is approximately 7.8 miles.

I would say that given the location of LaGuardia airport's distance being almost 2x's the distance from 7WTC, I would say that the 4mph is substantially more accurate than the 20mph that Achimspok has calculated.

If that's accurate. Achimspok, is that accurate? Femr2, any thoughts?

No, it's wrong.
1) I didn't calculate anything. I measured the speed of the wind at 1300ft
2) The weather report - even in cities - gives you wind speeds because it do not differ within 1 or 2 or 5 miles that much BUT buildings etc might have a big influence e.g. the wake effect we are talking about right now
3) the La Guardia wind speed was used somewhere in the NIST report. There I found the link. Not that wrong I guess.
4) Central Park is surrounded by buildings. If you measure the wind speed at ground level there then you know the wind speed right there.

 

[achimspok]

Now, do you think that the wind around 7WTC would have caused much smoke from 5WTC to be mixed with the smoke of 7WTC? If so, how much.

List any assumptions.

Almost all.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/docs/wtc5_fire_floors.jpg
Direction of the smoke North West. Any idea?

http://infowars.net/pictures/mar07/200307WTC.jpg
Direction of the smoke North East. Same cause.

Removed hotlinked images. See Rule 5.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LashL

 

[beachnut]

Almost all.

Direction of the smoke North West. Any idea?


Direction of the smoke North East. Same cause.

Time of photos. Not that it matters since WTC7 was on... wait for it...Fire. Oh look, a building on fire being fought which saved it from collapse. No wonder WTC 7 fell it was on fire and was no fought. Are you failing again? Got your Cheney messed up with your WTC 7 and Mineta. You have how many delusions on 911? After 9 years this is not good. Most people can figure out 911 in minutes given the evidence and facts. Why is 911 truth self-debunking?

Smoke has what do do with free-fall and claims of CD, and conspiracies? Too bad you were not in NYC to see WTC7 fully involved in fire. How many do you have to call liars?

 

[GlennB]

Almost all.

Direction of the smoke North West. Any idea?

What tells you the direction of the smoke in that photo?

Direction of the smoke North East. Same cause.

That's WTC6, and there's nothing there to tell us the smoke is travelling N to any extent.

 

[achimspok]

What tells you the direction of the smoke in that photo?



That's WTC6, and there's nothing there to tell us the smoke is travelling N to any extent.

 

[alienentity]

This building is also on fire and is producing black smoke:

ps count the number of stories involved....

 

[alienentity]

We're back to square one: Both WTC 6 and 7 were on fire, and achimspok is still incorrect that the smoke seen in my previous post is from WTC 6. It isn't.
A fool can see this.

Here is a video which clearly shows smoke pouring directly from the windows of WTC 7. But achimspok, who is apparently suffering from an advanced case of the 'irreducible delusion', cannot see this. Oh well.....



ETA Truther doctrine does not allow for extensive fires in WTC 7, that would mean that it could have collapsed from the fires. Not permissible! So the smoke pouring from WTC 7's windows must therefore be coming from another building.
That's not a caricature of achimspok's position, that's what he's actually proposing!!

Normal skeptics, on the other hand, can allow for fire in WTC 7, 6 and 5 without any problems. It doesn't threaten us, therefore we do not need to deny it. We're not arguing against reality, after all, we're arguing for it - that's always a strong position in the end.

 

[achimspok]

This building is also on fire and is producing black smoke:

[qimg]http://i900.photobucket.com/albums/ac206/alienentity1/wtcc-1.jpg[/qimg]

ps count the number of stories involved....

NIST:

A lot of big words, alienentity. The Steven Spak video was shot at or before noon. Notice all the faces facing west including the SW facing west wall of WTC7 in the shadow. Look at the image you posted above. The fire visible in the video died down in the image. That's what I'm talking about. (That's not a caricature of alienentity's sloppy position, that's how he actually debunks himself!)

ps count the number of stories involved... (Pssst, Pitts of NIST already did it.)

 

[GlennB]

http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/4332/wtc7smoke.png

Your blue arrows and label show a prevailing north-easterly wind. Why? That appears to be about 90° out.

Drawing straight lines on 2D photos does not tell us the direction the smoke was moving.

Nice wind pattern diagrams though. However WTC5 (the current subject) was much lower than the neighbouring buildings. Any swirl around WTC7 would be happening way above WTC5 and would, in any case, be heavily affected by the (upwind) Verizon and Irving Trust buildings.

I'd also be interested in the provenance of the WTC5 fire photo you've used.

Why don't you watch the Spak video that was linked earlier? You can see along Vesey St into the distance. The smoke is not coming from WTC5.

 

[femr2]

This building is also on fire and is producing black smoke:

[qimg]http://i900.photobucket.com/albums/ac206/alienentity1/wtcc-1.jpg[/qimg]

ps count the number of stories involved....

Very difficult to tell. About 5 or 6 ?

Again, you need to be able to see through the smoke to determine which windows are broken, and therefore determine what elements of your photo are basically an optical illusion...

 

[Sabretooth]

No, it's wrong.
1) I didn't calculate anything. I measured the speed of the wind at 1300ft
2) The weather report - even in cities - gives you wind speeds because it do not differ within 1 or 2 or 5 miles that much BUT buildings etc might have a big influence e.g. the wake effect we are talking about right now
3) the La Guardia wind speed was used somewhere in the NIST report. There I found the link. Not that wrong I guess.
4) Central Park is surrounded by buildings. If you measure the wind speed at ground level there then you know the wind speed right there.

Wrong.

Wind speed can vary...sometimes greatly...in as little distance as 50 yards or less.

Perhaps you've never heard of wind shear and/or micro bursts?

 

[alienentity]

NIST:


A lot of big words, alienentity. The Steven Spak video was shot at or before noon. Notice all the faces facing west including the SW facing west wall of WTC7 in the shadow. Look at the image you posted above. The fire visible in the video died down in the image. That's what I'm talking about. (That's not a caricature of alienentity's sloppy position, that's how he actually debunks himself!)

ps count the number of stories involved... (Pssst, Pitts of NIST already did it.)

achimspok, your aim is way off - you've missed your intended target and hit the strawman instead.

We all know that the fires weren't constant in any one area, that's not news.

We also know that the discussion is about smoke, specifically whether it came from WTC 7 itself or another building.

Your false claim is that the smoke doesn't actually come from WTC 7. This has already been disproven by both videos and still images which show that a lot of smoke was in fact emanating directly from windows on not just the South but also the West faces.

You can quotemine anybody you wish, it won't change those facts. Sorry that you've chosen the wrong idea to stand behind - it makes your work that much more frustrating, and mine that much easier.

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

I just want Achimspok to produce some evidence for his case instead of quote-mining & dodging.

If Achimspok is up to that challenge?