WTC7 and the girder walk-off between column 79 and 44

[LSSBB]

It's easy to win a game when you define the rules yourself.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

It's easy to win a game when you define the rules yourself.

Nobody defined any separate or new rules. This game is over and the NIST collapse initiation for WTC 7 shown to be impossible due to the laws of physics and reality that have always existed.

 

[Dave Rogers]

It's easy to win a game when you define the rules yourself can simply declare yourself the winner.

FTFY.

Dave

 

[tsig]

Nobody defined any separate or new rules. This game is over and the NIST collapse initiation for WTC 7 shown to be impossible due to the laws of physics and reality that have always existed.

If the collapse was impossible WTC 7 would still be standing.

 

[newton3376]

Mr. Szamboti's is performing back-of-the-envelope calculations, finding out where most of the push comes from, then claims that since his simple linear 1D analysis doesn't show ALL of the push that NIST therefor tricked the non-linear 3D analysis into producing more push than what really happened.

Of course, the reason why is he wrong is obvious to anyone who isn't suffering from hideous confirmation bias. And it's not even the first time that he's done this.

Remember when Tony did his own non-linear 3D analysis and showed everyone in the engineering community that NIST was wrong?

Oh......................



wait.............................

 

[Animal]

Nobody defined any separate or new rules. This game is over and the NIST collapse initiation for WTC 7 shown to be impossible due to the laws of physics and reality that have always existed.

Whom too believe.......NIST and the many many supporting studies from engineers around the world, or Tony and the napkin calculations done with blinders and an agenda..........................what a tough choice.....

 

[LSSBB]

FTFY.

Dave

Ah yes, perfect encapsulation of the response to my post. Well done, Sir!

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Amazing, incredible, pick your word, to understand how Dave Rogers has the audacity to say others have declared themselves winners when he refuses to do anything to support what he says.

That is other than to say he believes NIST got 6.25 inches of translation out of 53 foot long beams, which can't possibly expand more than about 4.75 inches no matter how hot they got, with the load on them, when their sag and the shortening caused by it is factored in with expansion.

On top of the inability of the beams to push the girder anywhere near 6.25 inches, there were stiffeners on the girder which would have required the girder to be pushed more than 9 inches before walk-off would even be possible.

What it appears we actually have with Dave and other like minded individuals here is a bunch who cannot let go of preconceived notions, no matter what they are shown, and their sour grapes.

 

[Justin39640]

Amazing, incredible, pick your word, to understand how Dave Rogers has the audacity to say others have declared themselves winners when he refuses to do anything to support what he says.

That is other than to say he believes NIST got 6.25 inches of translation out of 53 foot long beams, which can't possibly expand more than about 4.75 inches no matter how hot they got, with the load on them, when their sag is factored in with expansion.

What it appears we actually have with Dave and other like minded individuals here is a bunch who cannot let go of preconceived notions, no matter what they are shown, and their sour grapes.

3 story bulge. Stop looking at one beam and look at the whole picture. Sheesh.

 

[DGM]

What it appears we actually have here is a bunch of people who cannot let go of preconceived notions, no matter what they are shown, and their sour grapes.

Would that include nearly the whole structural engineering community? Strange how insignificantly few have noticed these glaring errors you seem to have no problem pointing out.

Any thoughts on why this might be? Afraid of loosing their jobs? Blissfully unaware?

 

[Oystein]

...how Dave Rogers has the audacity to say others have declared themselves winners when he refuses to do anything to support what he says. ...

Uhm...

It's easy to win a game when you define the rules yourself.

... This game is over ...

It's easy to win a game when you define the rules yourself can simply declare yourself the winner..

FTFY.

Dave

Dave said this immediately after you simply declared yourself the winner, Tony. I think that qualifies as "support what he says"

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Would that include nearly the whole structural engineering community? Strange how insignificantly few have noticed these glaring errors you seem to have no problem pointing out.

Any thoughts on why this might be? Afraid of loosing their jobs? Blissfully unaware?

Most aren't aware since this topic has not been covered much in the press.

All of my engineering colleagues, that I showed the collapse of WTC 7 to and then explained what the present official story for it was, thought the present official story to be ridiculous.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Uhm...



Dave said this immediately after you simply declared yourself the winner, Tony. I think that qualifies as "support what he says"

Dave lost by forfeit as he was either unable or unwilling to defend his position.

Here is a crybaby icon which is appropriate for many of you guys.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

3 story bulge. Stop looking at one beam and look at the whole picture. Sheesh.

This comment is ridiculous and pathetic.

It is amazing that you are actually proposing that what has been described as a bulge between floors 10 and 13 at the southwest corner of a 300 foot long by 144 wide building was somehow a sign that the building would completely collapse. This alleged bulge was where there was some debris damage from WTC 1.

I can only say one thing to this kind of ninny nonsense.

 

[DGM]

Most aren't aware since this topic has not been covered much in the press.

So you're going with "blissfully unaware". Strange for such a large group. How often is the press's opinion considered in engineering issues?

All of my engineering colleagues, that I showed the collapse of WTC 7 to and then explained what the present official story for it was, thought the present official story to be ridiculous.

You would think this support would "snowball". Are your "colleagues" afraid to tell other colleagues?

 

[triforcharity]

This comment is ridiculous and pathetic.

It is amazing that you are actually proposing that what has been described as a bulge between floors 10 and 13 at the southwest corner of a 300 foot long by 144 wide building was somehow a sign that the building would completely collapse. This alleged bulge was where there was some debris damage from WTC 1.

I can only say one thing to this kind of ninny nonsense.

Hey Tony, do you know one the most telltale signs a building is in severe danger of collapse is bulging? This has been taught to firefighters (not even engineers, but firefighters ) for...about 30 years or so. This is not a new concept for them, why is this so foreign to you?

 

[Tony Szamboti]

So you're going with "blissfully unaware". Strange for such a large group. How often is the press's opinion considered in engineering issues?


You would think this support would "snowball". Are your "colleagues" afraid to tell other colleagues?

Most thought it was too big for them to do anything about and were reluctant to put their name on a petition for fear of something which could damage their ability to make a living.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Hey Tony, do you know one the most telltale signs a building is in severe danger of collapse is bulging? This has been taught to firefighters (not even engineers, but firefighters ) for...about 30 years or so. This is not a new concept for them, why is this so foreign to you?

Another pathetic comment, but with an attempt to appeal to firefighters training as though they would all agree that the building would collapse without any details or further explanation.

You shouldn't be trying to hide behind anyone, so tell us why you think a bulge at floors 10 to 13 on the southwest corner of the 300 foot long x 144 foot wide WTC 7 was in any way indicative of a full or even partial collapse of the building.

 

[Newtons Bit]

Dave lost by forfeit as he was either unable or unwilling to defend his position.

If there was a good icon for crybabies I would put one up for many of you guys.

There you go again, claiming victory.

 

[DGM]

Most thought it was too big for them to do anything about and were reluctant to put their name on a petition for fear of something which could damage their ability to make a living.

And your proof of this is what?

Could it be they just didn't want to hurt your feeling?

You are basically claiming the the worlds SE community took no interest what so ever in the events of 9/11.

This "sheep" in not buying it.