Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
DeathDart said:
Vertical supports are weakened making them flexible.
Horizontal connections are cut.
A slight disturbance, like an increase in wind speed will cause a slight bowing in a few elements, then all of them.
Every element could then bow away from the center, the core will split like a banana as the collapse proceeds downward.
Tensile forces on the core transform into bending or shearing forces.
Click to expand...

Is it your contention, then, that the only thing that was needed was a means of initiation? That is, once the collapse begins it proceeds under its own momentum basically to the ground?
 
NoahFence said:
If you bold that, it'll be true.

No it won't. Sorry.



Massive explosions, explosives debris is. Please refer to one of the several photo's I've posted of a collapsed WTC 7 and point to me where the casings, detcord...etc... are.
Click to expand...
This has been answered many times but like all information that refures the OCT, it is denied, ignored and or forgotten.

It was possible to set demolition charges using wireless technology. Y'all will persist in denying this but that's OK.
 
This has been answered many times but like all information that refures the OCT, it is denied, ignored and or forgotten.

It was possible to set demolition charges using wireless technology. Y'all will persist in denying this but that's OK
Click to expand...

Why would they need to if they could just get someone to go in there and commit arson?

*I would also suggest that along with firefighting, engineering, architecture and carpentry, you have no idea how radios and wireless technology works.
 
NoahFence said:
Why not? You do.


*Quote mining is a well known form of lying, and it's not as sly as you think. It's pretty obvious, especially when you quote mine someone's own words back to them.
Click to expand...
"Quote mining" is a meaningless term used by deniers to describe any quote that makes a point they want to deny. It's a perfect last stand denial technique.
 
sylvan8798 said:
Is it your contention, then, that the only thing that was needed was a means of initiation? That is, once the collapse begins it proceeds under its own momentum basically to the ground?
Click to expand...

Once the core peals back (uniformly) it will only stop when, or if, the shearing force converts back to tensile. This can be when the core material is too thick to bend anymore. The central core had wall thicknesses of ¼ inch at the top and 3 inches at the bottom.

Another variable is the uniformity of the collapsing front. The material following the front might start shifting to one side and the total collapse will become a partial collapse. The collapsing front speeds up along the weak side of the core. The center of the collapsing rubble pile moves to one side and a portion of the structure might remain.
 
DeathDart said:
Once the core peals back (uniformly) it will only stop when, or if, the shearing force converts back to tensile. This can be when the core material is too thick to bend anymore. The central core had wall thicknesses of ¼ inch at the top and 3 inches at the bottom.

Another variable is the uniformity of the collapsing front. The material following the front might start shifting to one side and the total collapse will become a partial collapse. The collapsing front speeds up along the weak side of the core. The center of the collapsing rubble pile moves to one side and a portion of the structure might remain.
Click to expand...

That didn't make much sense.:confused:
 
Christopher7 said:
"Quote mining" is a meaningless term used by deniers to describe any quote that makes a point they want to deny. It's a perfect last stand denial technique.
Click to expand...

It's not meaningless. It's used by (failed) twoofers to confuse people.

IT NEVER WORKS.

You do it several times a day.

IT NEVER WORKS. WE'RE SMARTER THAN THAT.


You say that "they considered going to WTC 7" and quote that passage, but fail to quote the next 78 friggin pages that explain why.

IT NEVER WORKS. You're not NEARLY as sly as you think you are. Not even close.
 
DGM said:
Arson to lose money? Do you plan to back-up your assertion that the towers were "past their economic prime" or do you just hope people will take your word?
Click to expand...
Well, depending on who you ask, Larry S. did get a "windfall"/"make a bundle" on them. That seems inconsistent with buildings past their economic prime.

leftysergeant said:
You want to see a powder monkey get emotional, just whip out a two-way radio or cell phone while he is handling blasting caps.
Click to expand...
I wasted some time arguing with Brian "smug.bug" Good on ScrewLooseChange yesterday. I pointed out it would take miles of wiring. He said there were powerful radio repeaters inside the elevator shafts. I pointed out that a)in one of his own earlier points, he had pointed out there was no line of sight to the upper floors, b)the elevators weren't structural supports c)a building made of steel would interfere with the signal, d)there would be a good chance radios would interfere with the signal, etc. I successfully managed to get him into broken-record mode, where he claimed I was wrong repeatedly without producing any evidence.

Fun times.

Christopher7 said:
Yes I have. They had plenty of firefighters to do both. They sent 40 to put out the fires in WTC 7 between 11:00 a.m. and noon. One of your guys posted that.
Click to expand...
Just like they had "enough" water, eh, Chris7? Eh?

You're conflating "fighting fire" with "putting out a fire". Those are two very different things.

Christopher7 said:
I present evidence but you just deny it.
Click to expand...
I was talking about my nemesis FoosM on ATS, but now that you mention it, you still haven't said how much water was available, and how much would be "enough", nor addressed why the FDNY would bother to fight fire in the building at all with higher priorities nearby, nor addressed the question of FDNY's complicity. You refuse to give your assertions context. You're making bricks without clay, Christopher7, and then trying to build a house on it.

Free fall acceleration is proof of CD but you refuse to accept that.
Click to expand...
Nope. It's proof of what looks like free-fall acceleration. Given that certain parts of the WTC collapse (as I've read elsewhere on this forum) exceeded FFA, then it means FFA is not a reliable indicator that the pieces moving at what looked like FFA were actually in freefall.

The fire that NIST says started the collapse had gone out but you refuse to accept that too.
Click to expand...
Others have already addressed that. Your evidence for this claim consists of, what, one photo, which you later described as conclusive evidence. Also, you seem to be assuming that the fire's effects would not persist past the fire itself. Also, also, why would the FDNY need water to fight a fire that you claim already went out?

Christopher7 said:
Whistle blowers lose their jobs and sometimes are framed and go to prison. Google "whistle blowers" and see what people like Coleen Rowley has to say.
Click to expand...
You mean the lady who said the FBI was incompetent, not in on it, and won Time's person of the year award? Her? Yeah, her life is terrible.

Too bad there's no form of media that promises near-complete anonymity, and an infinite number of venues and access points for any hypothetical whistleblower to disseminate their incriminating information, a form of media that has been growing easier and easier to access over the past ten years since 9/11. Some sort of computer network, or something. Some kind of interlinked network of computers. Too bad there's no such thing.

Christopher7 said:
This has been answered many times but like all information that refures the OCT, it is denied, ignored and or forgotten.

It was possible to set demolition charges using wireless technology. Y'all will persist in denying this but that's OK.
Click to expand...
As I said earlier in this post, that would be unreliable, what with fire, walls, structural members, and who knows what in the way, not to mention the risk of someone accidentally stumbling onto the frequency and setting off the charges early. Or did you not notice that most CDs and explosive detonations are wire-triggered for precisely that last reason?

If you start claiming that the detonators and casings were wired with self-destruct devices, then I'll tell you the same thing I told Smug; then you'd need self-destruct devices for the self-destruct devices, and the self-destruct devices for the self-destruct devices for the self-destruct devices, and it's turtles all the way down.
 
DeathDart said:
I believe the clay increases the production by (guess) providing a sticky surface for the reaction to occur. I think that CO and gypsum will form SO2 though the production without the clay will be reduced. Other materials present, soot, concrete particles may have substituted.

The debris also represented a massive heat insulator. Relatively low hydrogen production could create thermal runaway conditions in some areas until the primary fires were extinguished.
Click to expand...

I guess without reference to specific research, we just don't know what proportion of the gypsum could have been exposed to conditions suitable for the production of sulfuric acid, and your guess is as good or bad as the next person's.
If your chemical recipe is right (I don't even know if that is so), then we know that the production of some sulfuric acid somewhere is reasonably probable, but we can't say if that was a usual or exceptional event.
 
sylvan8798 said:
Hey, I think I'm getting the idea..:)
Click to expand...

The 9/11 conspiracy section: Where genuine skepticism is branded faith, and the whole concept of differing political ideologies goes to the crapper because everyone that disagree with the "dude" is leaping faith.
 
Last edited:
sylvan8798 said:
That didn't make much sense.:confused:
Click to expand...
Actually, it does. The videos show the front not proceding uniformly down all four sides of the towers and the collapse of WTC 7 involved a lot of twisting. In the case of WTC 7 there was no possibility of arrest once it started.

The towers did have a core which got stronger farther down. To some extent, it acted as a guide rod for the collapse of the floors. Theoreticly, i can see how that guide rod could have damped the effect of what was happening on one side of the building so that eventually, the collapse would be limited to one face.

Problem is that everything was too intimately inter-connected. One panel of perimeter columns connected three floors and was interlaced with all of the others.

When you are dealing with that much material, though, an increase of two inches in a steel element begins to mean less with each second that debris accumulates.
 
sylvan8798 said:
That didn't make much sense.:confused:
Click to expand...

The collapsing material material represents a front. If it begins uniformly the following floor (at all points of its area) is collapsing at the same rate.

If on the next floor 3 out of the 4 walls of the core fold but the fourth lags the others, more debris and force moves toward the side that folded quicker.

On the next floor the story repeats again except that there is a little less debris above the point that lagged previously.

Any non uniformity of the forces in the collapsing front will increase, the debris will choose the path of least resistance.

One side of the building will resist more than another side. For the debris to continue to fall straight down indefinitely, is not probable.

Think of the debris as a marble on top of a concave surface . It will want to roll down the highest incline. The collapsing front will move faster down one side of the core than the other, random variation is sufficient. If the building were infinitely tall the front would always move to one side (random) and the collapse would stop.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom