• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged New video! Architects and Engineers - Solving the Mystery of Building 7

KTB said:
Yes I had an example with the differences I highlighted.

Now we have established as a fact that a steel building can indeed collapse due to fire.

So could you now elaborate on the two points I raised so we can see what your objection is to it being possible that WTC was brought down by fire (you don't have to concede that that was actually what brought down WTC7). Please.
Click to expand...

Admitting the possibility of collapse by fire destroys the whole argument from incredulity that is the only thing remaining twoofers cling to, so it won't happen.
 
Marokkaan said:
First of all its 18 hours, and different fires, different environment....

Second the building did not collapsed...

I really dont understand why you are using this example.
Click to expand...

Ok. Show me a 1300' high tower with a steel, tube in tube design that was hit by a jet, suffered fires, yet remained standing.

If you cannot then that means they had to have collapsed because nowhere in history did one ever remain standing after those events.

Same logic as you're using right?
 
Gamolon said:
Yup. 400+ professors that believe WTC7 COMPLETELY collapsed in less than 7 seconds when videos show this to be completely untue.

Yeah, that hurts their intellectual credibility just a bit don't you think?

;)
Click to expand...
If 911 truth cared about intellectual credibility then 911 truth would cease to exist.

I think they call that a conundrum.
 
Remember....

NIST admits that WTC 7 *did*, *in fact*, fall at free fall acceleration for 2.4 seconds.

That means that approximately nine floors just VANISHED. They didn't offer ANY resistance whatsoever. They didn't gradually buckle, melt, shift, topple, or shake. ALL of the core columns, as well as the steel-reinforced concrete, just VANISHED. Not to be ever entertained again by the masses, especially by the caring people on this board who are oh so concerned about those who died on 9/11... and such "Theories", like 2.4 second free fall acceleration. Acceleration is just a theory, anyway... just like gravity!! It's not like all sides agree on such an event of free fall acceleration or anything.... Oh wait....

Who are the structural engineers in here, again?
 
Last edited:
How much resistance would a failed/buckled column provide?

Did you actually read the NIST report? (Above the buckled column region is what it says. Not that it matters, you'll handwave it away, and continue to spout ignorance and debunked nonsense. )
 
grndslm, this thread is about the 'Remember Building 7' fundraising campaign.

Take your incredulity about the building's collapse to the General Discussion thread, or any of the hundreds of WTC7 threads.
 
grndslm said:
Remember....

NIST admits that WTC 7 *did*, *in fact*, fall at free fall acceleration for 2.4 seconds.

That means that approximately nine floors just VANISHED. They didn't offer ANY resistance whatsoever. They didn't gradually buckle, melt, shift, topple, or shake. ALL of the core columns, as well as the steel-reinforced concrete, just VANISHED. Not to be ever entertained again by the masses, especially by the caring people on this board who are oh so concerned about those who died on 9/11... and such "Theories", like 2.4 second free fall acceleration. Acceleration is just a theory, anyway... just like gravity!! It's not like all sides agree on such an event of free fall acceleration or anything.... Oh wait....

Who are the structural engineers in here, again?
Click to expand...


Yes, you're right, there's absolutely no way anyone could explain that while staying within the laws of physics!


http://stripgenerator.com/strip/423723/cartoon-physics-the-peer-review-process/view/all/


full.png
 
Orphia Nay said:
grndslm, this thread is about the 'Remember Building 7' fundraising campaign.

Take your incredulity about the building's collapse to the General Discussion thread, or any of the hundreds of WTC7 threads.
Click to expand...

No its not, dont spread your lies here.
 
Marokkaan said:
No its not, dont spread your lies here.
Click to expand...
Great research, and situational awareness. Your research skills and situational awareness make you one of the best 911 truth movement members.

Marokkaan said:
No its not, dont spread your lies here.
Click to expand...
DGM said:
I believe he has me on ignore but, would someone tell him to apologize considering when her post was made it was in the wrong thread.(the post was moved here).

Way to go "truther".

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Doubt he has time to stop and think about things, the next delusional claim is coming, free of facts, with no evidence or proof.
 
beachnut said:
Great research, and situational awareness. Your research skills and situational awareness make you one of the best 911 truth movement members.



Doubt he has time to stop and think about things, the next delusional claim is coming, free of facts, with no evidence or proof.
Click to expand...
Yes. He's rather boring, with his shoot-from-the-hip responses that seem to lack any real thought.

I'm glad he has me on ingore.

I think the NWO sent an agent here with the specific mission of making truthers look bad.
 
Last edited:
The Controlled Demolition detonation of WTC building 7 is irrevocable proof that it WAS AN INSIDE JOB !! As if all the other **** that day wasn't immediate proof enough!



.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom