• 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 Freefall is not evidence for Controlled Demolition

GlennB said:
Rubble pics not really required (naturally, MM and others prefer shots taken from the north, where the tilt during collapse is not detectable)

[qimg]http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg274/sap-guy/wtc7leansouth-1.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

Plus you can see how the moment frame holds it together. I don't believe it would look like that in a CD. Although I am not a demolitions expert so I am not sure, I would think a moment frame CD would have to blow the columns at nearly every floor. Oz might know more.
 
LSSBB said:
Plus you can see how the moment frame holds it together. I don't believe it would look like that in a CD. Although I am not a demolitions expert so I am not sure, I would think a moment frame CD would have to blow the columns at nearly every floor. Oz might know more.
Click to expand...
Ooops....missed that hint. :o

1) I cannot say definitely. Yes the moment frame set up would make it stronger. But how much stronger is the question.
2) I doubt it would need "...to blow the columns at nearly every floor..." but how much more I cannot guesstimate.
3) I have over the years thought through how I would take down the Twins either by using CD assistance to aircraft damage or without the aircraft assistance. (Military engineering maxim - "think like the enemy". ;))
4) I have never gone into the details for WTC7
5) Reasons - there was no CD - nor any reasoned claim to prima facie standard from any genuine truther. And I rarely waste time responding to trolling - plus the variables for hypothetical scenarios are too wide.

Bottom line - your guess is probably as good as mine. :o
 
ok another hard evidence free kook website CM got any REAL proof and evidence?
 
Clayton Moore said:
"The weight of floors should have pulled the sides into the center. But they didn't and the frame collapsed on it's own. Go figure."
Click to expand...
jaydeehess said:
"The exterior DID get pulled south take a look at the pictures of the rubble Clayton. The entire western section fell to the SOUTH. The eastern portion, which was not part of the structure that included the old Con-Ed building, and suffered less central damage, fell to the north east, hitting the Fitter man building."
Click to expand...

This view of WTC7's south side, viewing from the SE corner indicates a primarily inward collapse.

7xw3.jpg


The collapse sequence below shows the prolonged vertical stability of the collapse.

3pp.png


Because of damage to the SW corner and the gouge in the middle of the south face of WTC7, it was not surprising that later in the global collapse the remaining structure would lean south.

MM
 
Miragememories said:
All people should be interested in the truth about 9/11, and in particular the truth behind the 8 story freefall shown in the WTC7 videos.

Doesn't playing a silly hand-waving game of; "gee WTC7 was falling like a brick, but I think we can prove it didn't attain FFA", bother you?

Verifiable scientific evidence has shown that the collapse of WTC7 is not plausibly explained by the final NIST report.

And whether or not WTC7 was plummeting to the earth at FFA or 0.99 FFA makes no real difference to the obvious significance of such a high speed building collapse.

During that portion of the collapse when WTC7 was dropping for 8 storeys, did you not try and visualize the pattern of support failure required to achieve a balanced high speed floor area collapse?

DROP-DROP-DROP-DROP-DROP-DROP-DROP-DROP

All the perimeter columns for complete floors amazingly 'snapping' at the same moment.

An incredible display of balanced-overloading, accidentally achieved by uncontrolled office furnishings fires?

There is a reason why prior to 9/11, no one had ever seen fire alone produce such a total high speed collapse of a steel-structured highrise.

The odds for such a thing happening are astronomically against.

MM
Click to expand...

If you understood the concept of buckling you would be less amazed at the floors falling.
 
LSSBB said:
So what does it say???? Don't toss off a link and run away, like that solves your problem. If you can't explain how what he heard ties directly to what was observed in any sensible way, then just stay out of the discussion until you have something meaningful.
Click to expand...

The purpose of providing a link is not to give you my interpretation of it. It's pretty damn obvious Jennings was trapped in WTC7 as a result of explosions that occurred before either of the towers collapsed.
 
CM its pretty obvious there were no explosions until the planes were crashed into the buildings, no fantasy youtube video will change that reality.
 
Clayton Moore said:
The purpose of providing a link is not to give you my interpretation of it. It's pretty damn obvious Jennings was trapped in WTC7 as a result of explosions that occurred before either of the towers collapsed.
Click to expand...

Its not obvious they were explosions, and if you want to argue that go back to the thread for it. Your pal ergo went around the blocks several times on it, and a timeline of sorts was hashed out.

In any case, unless you can tie what Jennings reported, directly to the collapse hours later, then just stay out of the discussion. The discussion, I must remind you again, is whether free fall means CD. If you cannot establish that it does, and you keep publishing things that have nothing to do with it, you are only derailing the discussion.
 
Clayton Moore said:
http://barryjenningsmystery.blogspot.com/
Click to expand...

You and I clearly have different definitions of the word "another"

Here, I'll help:

WTC 7 was a collapse that waited for hours after the explosions to collapse.

____ was the other building that waited for hours after the explosions to collapse.

CLAYTON MOORE:

You need to fill in that blank, for a cool grand.

AND....
GO!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom