Prove to me that the collapses did not look right

[sheeplesnshills]

No, you didn't. We went through all of this back in 2007, remember?

MM caught in another lie? I am shocked.

 

[Edx]

Wishful thinking.

Not even close.

These are your idea of steel-structured building fires that were fought and thus saved from collapse?

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/other_fires/madrid_burning.jpg
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/other_fires/mandarin_oriental_1.jpg

If any steel-structured building should have collapsed from fire they definitely should.

But they didn't.

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/other_fires/madrid_skyscraper.jpg
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/other_fires/mandarin_oriental_2.jpg

MM

Except of course, as you already know... the Windsor towers fire was fought, it was a traditional design with a concrete core and concrete reinforced floors... oh...and the steel collapsed




As for the Mandarin, its fire were also fought, a reinforced steel concrete building built after 911 and specifically designed to withstand earthquakes.

What makes these valid comparisons again?

 

[beachnut]

Wishful thinking.

Not even close.

These are your idea of steel-structured building fires that were fought and thus saved from collapse?

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/other_fires/madrid_burning.jpg
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/other_fires/mandarin_oriental_1.jpg

If any steel-structured building should have collapsed from fire they definitely should.

But they didn't.

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/other_fires/madrid_skyscraper.jpg
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/other_fires/mandarin_oriental_2.jpg

MM

You are wrong again. Madrid building has a concrete center section. Big fail on your part.
Plus http://www.life.com/news-pictures/52190252/fire-engulfs-windsor-building-in-madrid
The fire as seen was fought. You present fought fires, to compare to fires NOT fought. Big fail again.


Sorry, the Madrid fire was fought, and the core was concrete. The building totaled by fire. Again you fail as you don't have a clue the fires at WTC 1 2, and 7 were not fought.

Mandarin fire, fought. " The fire was put out ". Fail again.

Your research is poor. You show fires at night, and fires which were fought. Not good. 10 years of failure repeated.

This is why your claims of thermite are delusional nonsense. Go ahead, take 10 more years to join reality. You are leaving a legacy of delusions.'

Ironic you show a section which collapsed, a burning section which totally collapsed, posting a photo proving your claim on a small scale to be a lie and nonsense. The steel is bending from an office fire, oops.
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/other_fires/madrid_burning.jpg

See, it collapsed, below that area the water reached. Trying to compare fires fought with fires not fought will only make you look bad.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cuellar/19755967/


then you show this
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/other_fires/mandarin_oriental_1.jpg
A night time photo of building on fire, but not a big fire. In the day time this fire would not look like fire. Nice try, using night time photos of fire to fool those too challenged to know you are full of junk.


You show the photo of Madrid which was above the stream of water. You have no clue, that section was collapsing, just after that photo. Pretty bad evidence, proves steel fails quickly in fire. You failed to research Madrid! The building was totaled by fire, it too weak to use. Gone. Better look up fires not fought.

Steel fails in fire.
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/firesafetyengineering&theperformanceofst

 

[Travis]

I'm not sure why the other buildings would matter anyways. When the 1985 earthquake struck Mexico City some skyscrapers collapsed and some didn't. That's just the way things go.

 

[Robrob]

As I recall, the extent of your evidence that the building you worked in was 'similar' to the WTC towers was that someone once told you in passing in 1972 that it was of 'suspension design' or something to that effect.

Well to be fair, both his building and the WTC had walls, ceilings and windows. Probably both had basements as well. Pretty much identical if you ask me...

 

[twinstead]

You mean one has to consider how a building was constructed to judge how it would behave in a fire? I'm shocked. SHOCKED I say!

 

[triforcharity]

There are no proven examples of modern steel-structured office buildings being felled by fire.

Yes, there are plenty. Just one, off the top of my head, is the Sofa King store in Charleston SC.

The steel failed in LESS than 45 minutes.

But, you''ll shift those goalposts in your very next post.

Regardless of the uniqueness of the WTC building designs (not truly unique, I worked in an office tower in Toronto of similar construction),

So, you working in a steel framed office building. Cool. Guarantee that is was nothing like the WTC.

Perhaps in the case of those non-steel-structured buildings which completely collapsed from fire, you could argue their plastic content was lower.

Which means.......

In order to believe that WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 were high speed total collapses triggered by the ultimate effects of fire, it is necessary to accept that fire was able to far out perform controlled demolition technology.

Poisoning the well.

Actually, if it was a CD, it would have fallen much sooner. As in, not 56 minutes after the button was pushed.

WTC2 is of particular interest, in that 56 minutes after aircraft impact, it was supposedly induced by fire to perform a high speed collapse.

Again, poisoning the well.

Fire and damage from plane impact. Remember the plane?

56 minutes for burning office furnishings to supposedly make the structural steel totally and rapidly fail.

The Sofa King store fire, caused the complete collapse in less than 45 minutes.

Why I find this especially interesting, is that there was a long period where a heavy flow of molten steel was falling from a critical corner where the collapse was initiated.

10-20 seconds after this flow of molten steel ceased, the collapse began.

Coincidence?

I do not believe so.

Sorry, take your BELIEF over to religion, we deal with facts here.

The result of thermite and not ordinary fire?

Yes.

MM

So, thermite cut through what in the course of 10-20 seconds that caused this "rapid onset of collapse" that just so happened to start at the SAME PLACE that there was FIRE.

Fail square. That is where you belong.

 

[triforcharity]

Wishful thinking.

Not even close.

These are your idea of steel-structured building fires that were fought and thus saved from collapse?

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/other_fires/madrid_burning.jpg
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/other_fires/mandarin_oriental_1.jpg

If any steel-structured building should have collapsed from fire they definitely should.

But they didn't.

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/other_fires/madrid_skyscraper.jpg
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/other_fires/mandarin_oriental_2.jpg

MM

OOPS!! The Madrid Office building was concrete below, and steel above. The entire steel only portion, collapsed.

OOPS!! The Mandarin Oriental building used concrete for it's core, and protection of the steel.

OOPS!! Check back into Failsquare.

 

[NoahFence]

Did MM really just show pics of:

1) A reinforced steel building where all of the unreinforced steel collapse

and

2) A building built AFTER 9/11 with the safety guidelines learned from the collapses utilized?

Would you expect anything else?

 

[tsig]

Well to be fair, both his building and the WTC had walls, ceilings and windows. Probably both had basements as well. Pretty much identical if you ask me...

And they were all designed to resist gravity.

 

[RedIbis]

Yes, there are plenty. Just one, off the top of my head, is the Sofa King store in Charleston SC.

The steel failed in LESS than 45 minutes.

It's concerning to say the least, especially as a Florida resident, that a self proclaimed fire science professor thinks a one story retail store is an office building.

I'm sure the Sofa King store was the one off the top of your head because there are no examples of steel framed high rises collapsing from fire.

 

[DGM]

.......................... because there are no examples of steel framed high rises collapsing from fire.

And this means what? This argument is equally as lame as the "it looked like a CD".

 

[NoahFence]

It's concerning to say the least, especially as a Florida resident, that a self proclaimed fire science professor thinks a one story retail store is an office building.

I'm sure the Sofa King store was the one off the top of your head because there are no examples of steel framed high rises collapsing from fire.

Did it fail or not? It's more than adequate to prove the point. Stick that one story retail store on top of the trade towers.

After it fails, it collapses onto the weakened floor below.
Now two retail stores are collapsing onto the floor below.
Then 3
Then 4
Then 5
Then 6
then 110.

 

[Miragememories]

"...Regardless of the uniqueness of the WTC building designs (not truly unique, I worked in an office tower in Toronto of similar construction), the contents of the floors can be validly compared to the floor contents of other buildings..."

"No, you didn't. We went through all of this back in 2007, remember? You couldn't even accurately describe the building you claimed to work in, never mind its age, the number of floors it had (you claimed to have been in the 22nd storey stairwell of an 18 storey building), or the building next door that you claimed was its 'twin tower' - which turned out to be a 6 storey building that you were 'positive' was built at the same time but which turned out to have been built 15 years later - let alone provide any evidence whatsoever about its construction being 'similar' to the WTC towers. As I recall, the extent of your evidence that the building you worked in was 'similar' to the WTC towers was that someone once told you in passing in 1972 that it was of 'suspension design' or something to that effect."

Yes. Yes I did!

I remember our discourse quite well C.

Yes, I was wrong about a few minor and irrelevant factual details.

I worked on the 2nd floor and said it was a 22 story building instead of 18. I didn't check because it was irrelevant to the subject under discussion. The type of building construction was unaffected by my error in floor count.

Please show me where I was wrong about how old my building was?

At that time, other than a supermarket, there were no other co-joined major buildings. The previously built sister building, a 17-story companion office tower was a few storefronts further north, located at the corner.

The diminutive 6-story building you try and make much hay out of was, for the people working in the towers, mostly perceived as part of the internal walkway to the tower on the corner. But yes it was a building replacing a previous unrelated building, constructed 15 years later.

Again, its existence and my failure to provide information about it, is totally irrelevant to the point under discussion.

In typical lawyer fashion, you focus on irrelevant minutiae, and conveniently ignore important details that might hurt the case you wish to present.

The relevant part of all this, the type of building construction, was not knowledge casually passed on by someone in passing.

The reason I knew that my building was of similar construction to the WTC Twin Towers, was because I was asked to photograph it for an architectural student who was using it as part of his thesis. He explained to me how special its design was in that it allowed for very open customizable floors by utilizing the suspension-type design used in WTC Towers.

MM

 

[DGM]

In order to believe that WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 were high speed total collapses triggered by the ultimate effects of fire, it is necessary to accept that fire was able to far out perform controlled demolition technology.

MM

Why would you think it did? The fires took much longer to initiate the collapse. After that gravity did all the rest (just like in a CD).

 

[sheeplesnshills]

I'm sure the Sofa King store was the one off the top of your head because there are no examples of steel framed high rises collapsing from fire.

Nonsense, at least three have done so. WTC1, 2 and 7.

We have a tiny data set of high rises that have had major fires, and an even smaller data set of those that had the same design as the WTC towers and had unfought fires.

100% of those designed like the WTC towers and that suffered unfought fires all collapsed.

That another building of a different design did not fail during a fought fire is utterly irrelevent.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

The reason I knew that my building was of similar construction to the WTC Twin Towers, was because I was asked to photograph it for an architectural student who was using it as part of his thesis. He explained to me how special its design was in that it allowed for very open customizable floors by utilizing the suspension-type design used in WTC Towers.

MM

So MM when did it suffer from major unfought fire and not collapse?

 

[Justin39640]

It's concerning to say the least, especially as a Florida resident, that a self proclaimed fire science professor thinks a one story retail store is an office building.

I'm sure the Sofa King store was the one off the top of your head because there are no examples of steel framed high rises collapsing from fire.

I would assume it's a pretty good example. Mostly because if fire made a roof collapse with no weight on it, fire could absolutely do it to the WTC with lots of weight on top of the damaged floors own weight. McCormick Place too. If you ever look at the underside of a roof in an industrial or retail business, it's usually a similar looking truss design. Able to hold up a large heavy roof while maximizing your selling floor space or warehousing capacity. Go to a Best Buy and look up.

 

[minnemouse]

I have followed the thread closely. I have clicked every link, but when I clicked serendipity.li and read this;
"This website is based on a libertarian (in the sense of J.S.Mill) perspective and is opposed to Fascism, Zionism, Capitalism, the New World Order and all who secretly work to cause wars for their own advantage and profit." I realized that some folks just dont understand source criticism. Its like trying to make my case against prostitution by linking to a pimps homepage.

 

[Robrob]

So MM when did it suffer from major unfought fire and not collapse?

Not to mention when it was struck by a laden jet airliner?