Total Building Collapse from a Single Column Failure

[NoahFence]

It is they who have to rerun their analysis.

You keep repeating this silly, silly meme.

In order for them to "have to" do anything, there should be some sort of sound evidence that WTC 7 was indeed felled by explosives. There is no sound evidence.

There would have to be some obvious alternative connection to the events of the rest of the day for anybody (other than you people) to even entertain the thought of re-investigating any aspect of WTC 7's demise. There is no other connection aside from what the rest of the world knows and acknowledges.

It is incumbent upon YOU, Mr. Szamboti - you and your cohorts - to come up with a working theory that connects WTC 7's demise to the rest of the day's events, in their entirety, that explains those events better than 19 terrorists + 4 planes = 9/11.

Or in the case of WTC 7, the fact that if you drop a 110 story building on top of a 47 story building, : happens.

Make the connection - and you convert everybody. It's that simple. Nobody who matters is going to care to look any further into flanges and seats and stiffeners and girders until they have to. And they DON'T have to - not unless another sound theory arises. That's on you guys. Do your job.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

You keep repeating this silly, silly meme.

In order for them to "have to" do anything, there should be some sort of sound evidence that WTC 7 was indeed felled by explosives. There is no sound evidence.

There would have to be some obvious alternative connection to the events of the rest of the day for anybody (other than you people) to even entertain the thought of re-investigating any aspect of WTC 7's demise. There is no other connection aside from what the rest of the world knows and acknowledges.

It is incumbent upon YOU, Mr. Szamboti - you and your cohorts - to come up with a working theory that connects WTC 7's demise to the rest of the day's events, in their entirety, that explains those events better than 19 terrorists + 4 planes = 9/11.

Or in the case of WTC 7, the fact that if you drop a 110 story building on top of a 47 story building, : happens.

Make the connection - and you convert everybody. It's that simple. Nobody who matters is going to care to look any further into flanges and seats and stiffeners and girders until they have to. And they DON'T have to - not unless another sound theory arises. That's on you guys. Do your job.

I think everyone knows that the NIST was funded to explain the collapse of WTC 7. They have not yet done that since the omitted structural features make their initiation hypothesis impossible when included.

 

[DGM]

I think everyone knows that the NIST was funded to explain the collapse of WTC 7. They have not yet done that since the omitted structural features make their initiation hypothesis impossible when included.

Maybe you guys could actually fund something other than Gages retirement fund. You do know he's using you?

 

[Animal]

From reading your comments I have seen you say that the incorrect centered stiffener the NIST FEA model uses under the girder bearing seat at column 79 would make it harder to fail. That is as incorrect as the component they used.

It would have been much harder for the girder to fail with the actual heavy support plate which is welded to the column 79 side plates and sits under the bearing seat.

However, the under seat support is not the major issue. It is the girder stiffeners and the lateral support beams and correct seat width that will make a very big difference in the outcome.

Column side plates? LMAO.....you don't even know the correct terminology an you what to lecture NIST? No wonder the troofer movement consists of a gnats ass worth of architects and engineers. The under set stiffener is no more a major issue than the web stiffener. You can stomp your feet and repeat your claim time and again.......it doesn't change the fact that your claims are meaningless.

 

[Animal]

I think everyone knows that the NIST was funded to explain the collapse of WTC 7. They have not yet done that since the omitted structural features make their initiation hypothesis impossible when included.

They have....they just didn't arrive at the preconceived outcome you and youe extremely tiny little group wanted.

 

[Animal]

If the beam connections to the girder are broken then how do they push it to the point where its web is past its seat, as the NIST report claimed?

If you have to ask that question....you have no business making any claims about the NIST. (But then that was already obvious)

 

[gerrycan]

Column side plates? LMAO.....you don't even know the correct terminology an you what to lecture NIST?

From http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/upload/WTC-Part-IIC-WTC-7-Collapse-Final.pdf Page 11

Remind me. What is it that you do for a living Animal?

 

[DGM]

From http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/upload/WTC-Part-IIC-WTC-7-Collapse-Final.pdf Page 11

Remind me. What is it that you do for a living Animal?

What do you do?

Funny, why do you ask this question? Does it matter?

 

[gerrycan]

What do you do?

Funny, why do you ask this question? Does it matter?

Yeah it is funny, I agree. Animal told me he was an architect.
He then says that someone who uses the term "side-plate" is in error and would have no business "lecturing NIST". However, like most other people in the construction industry, NIST tend to call plates that are added to the side of a column "column side plates". LMAO. Priceless.

 

[DGM]

Yeah it is funny, I agree. Animal told me he was an architect.
He then says that someone who uses the term "side-plate" is in error and would have no business "lecturing NIST". However, like most other people in the construction industry, NIST tend to call plates that are added to the side of a column "column side plates". LMAO. Priceless.

His argument does not depend on his profession.

Does yours? Why did you ask what he did?

 

[gerrycan]

His argument does not depend on his profession.

Does yours? Why did you ask what he did?

He already said what he does for a living. I think it is relevant that someone who claims to be an architect not only doesn't know what a side plate is called, but obviously has not read NISTs literature on the subject he is discussing.

Column side plates? LMAO.....you don't even know the correct terminology an you what to lecture NIST?

What do you call them Animal. Maybe you should inform NIST of their error - they could maybe release an erratum statement to correct it. LMAO

 

[DGM]

He already said what he does for a living. I think it is relevant that someone who claims to be an architect not only doesn't know what a side plate is called.

Obviously this is important to you.

What do you do?

I'm a General Contractor with 35 years experience.

You?

 

[NoahFence]

I think everyone knows that the NIST was funded to explain the collapse of WTC 7. They have not yet done that since the omitted structural features make their initiation hypothesis impossible when included.

Despite your laughable pleas to the contrary, 9-11 was larger than just WTC 7.

Until you people come to grips with that, and accept it, you'll remain irrelevant.

If that's what you're shooting for, good. Just admit it.

 

[gerrycan]

Obviously this is important to you.

What do you do?

I'm a General Contractor with 35 years experience.

You?

None of your business.

 

[DGM]

None of your business.

Don't ask of others that you are not prepared to divulge of yourself.

 

[gerrycan]

Don't ask of others that you are not prepared to divulge of yourself.

I did not ask anyone to divulge anything. I asked Animal to remind me what he did. He stated that he was an architect, I didn't ask what he did and he chose to put that information out all by himself.

Well...actually a licensed architect.

My request for him to remind me what he did for a living was rhetorical. It would be a foolish thing for a layman to make this statement......

Column side plates? LMAO.....you don't even know the correct terminology an you what to lecture NIST?

....without actually checking what term NIST used for the plates on the side of a column. But for an alleged architect not to know this, and then post that without checking is just silly. Animal obviously thought that there was a different name for the side plates. Funny that he isn't enlightening us.

Maybe Animal could let us know what the correct term for a side plate is?

 

[DGM]

I did not ask anyone to divulge anything. I asked Animal to remind me what he did. He stated that he was an architect, I didn't ask what he did and he chose to put that information out all by himself.


My request for him to remind me what he did for a living was rhetorical. It would be a foolish thing for a layman to make this statement......

....without actually checking what term NIST used for the plates on the side of a column. But for an alleged architect not to know this, and then post that without checking is just silly. Animal obviously thought that there was a different name for the side plates. Funny that he isn't enlightening us.

Maybe Animal could let us know what the correct term for a side plate is?

I'm guessing you're a dancer by trade. You do this often. Personally, I don't care. It has nothing to do with your argument being wrong. Funny, nothing about my job makes me know this.

Strange how education works.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

His argument does not depend on his profession.

Does yours? Why did you ask what he did?

Animal put his foot in his mouth by saying the term column side plates wasn't the proper nomenclature for plates used to build up H columns. This is indicative of much of the discourse seen here, especially by those who see no need for NIST to correct the WTC 7 report.

The NIST WTC 7 report has been proven to have fatal flaws in their collapse initiation hypothesis due to the omission of pertinent structural features which make that hypothesis impossible.

It is time to stop pulling tantrums and making incorrect claims like Animal did here, and demand that the agency charged with and funded to perform the task of investigating the collapse of WTC 7 (NIST) rerun the analysis and re-investigate the collapse until a realistic cause can be shown which matches the evidence (including the 8 story symmetric free fall of the exterior observed on video).

 

[mike3]

(deleted)

 

[gerrycan]

I'm guessing you're a dancer by trade. You do this often.

You askin' ?

Personally, I don't care.

Your words hurt

It has nothing to do with your argument being wrong. Funny, nothing about my job makes me know this.

Do you think that the fact that Animal claims to be an architect and that he didn't know what a side plate was called is indicative of someone who is a capable researcher, given that NIST use the term also. I want to know what Animal calls side plates. He was laughing his ass off about the term just a while ago. Now he's all quiet.

Strange how education works.

How do you know?