Are there any other reports about WTC 7?

[vinniem]

really?

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_1824447b1cfcfa7614.jpg[/qimg]

The resident sock has gone and now somone is posting exactly the same as him.

I repeat, only an idiot would believe that steel frame buidlings cannot collapse in unfought fires.

I am not saying fire can't collapse a building, i am saying it cannot guarantee collapse.

How did the people on the scene know for certain it was going to collapse? If they just had a fear it might then fair enough, but you keep telling me they were certain of it's imminent collapse. How were they so certain, when the mechanism for collapse wasn't known until 7 years later???

By the way, your picture shows a 3 storey building partially collapsed. Why didn't the wtc 5 and 6 collapse given that they really were "fully involved"?

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Unfought fire is not a guarantee of total global collapse.

Why does it need to be guaranteed?

All we need is a probability greater than zero.

 

[Edx]

No no, name another choice.

Explain the FDNY quotes about Building 7. Explain how there are no dissenters anywhere either on or after 911.

I've asked you this before, and you avoid it.

Why do you do that? Why is this such an unfair question? The firefighter's do not agree with practically everything truther's claim about WTC7, so can you please explain why that is?

BUMP... come on Vinniem.

 

[Garb]

I am not saying fire can't collapse a building, i am saying it cannot guarantee collapse.

How did the people on the scene know for certain it was going to collapse? If they just had a fear it might then fair enough, but you keep telling me they were certain of it's imminent collapse. How were they so certain, when the mechanism for collapse wasn't known until 7 years later???

By the way, your picture shows a 3 storey building partially collapsed. Why didn't the wtc 5 and 6 collapse given that they really were "fully involved"?

Because there were no super secret files in it?

I never understood the importance of having WTC 7 being a controlled demolition. Disregarding the lack of explosions prior to collapse, witness testimony asserting that the building was likely to collapse, and the logistics in getting workers to plant these demolitions in a working office building prior to collapse.

Care to enlighten us?

P.S.- You don't need to know the actual engineering aspects of a building to realize that it is likely to collapse.

 

[vinniem]

BUMP... come on Vinniem.

The firefighters do not agree with each other. Some say that EVERY floor was on fire, some use the phrase "fully involved", some say that several floors were on fire.

The ones that talk about collapse seem totally certain it would collapse. You tell me how they could be certain it would collapse. One of them said "there is no way to stop it". How did he know this? We only found out in 2008 that the mechanism was the failure of column 79. if it hadn't failked there may have been no collapse, so how did this guy know there would be a critical failure leading to global collapse? Was he psychic?

 

[dtugg]

No other choice yet, liar.

 

[Edx]

I am not saying fire can't collapse a building, i am saying it cannot guarantee collapse.

How did the people on the scene know for certain it was going to collapse? If they just had a fear it might then fair enough, but you keep telling me they were certain of it's imminent collapse. How were they so certain, when the mechanism for collapse wasn't known until 7 years later???

Then why don't you read the quotes by the firefighters to see why they believed it would collapse?

The firefighter's witnessed:

It was burning out of control on many floors for over 7 hours unfought, it had a massive gash to the south side, it was groaning, bulging, leaning, creaking and things were crackling and falling.

So how do you explain how none of them being surprised at its collapse?

Why didn't the wtc 5 and 6 collapse given that they really were "fully involved"?

6 did collapse, internally, quite dramatically. But it was only 8 stories high and a traditional design.

In fact some conspiracy theorists claim WTC6 was also demolished LOL.

Also, when they eventually demolished the remaining WTC buildings they didn't use explosives because they were too worried about the stability of the building and the safety of workers going in to set the charges. You will know this if you have watched American Rebuilds which people like Alex Jones quote mines for the idea that "pull it" meant explosives.

 

[TruthersLie]

The firefighters do not agree with each other. Some say that EVERY floor was on fire, some use the phrase "fully involved", some say that several floors were on fire.

The ones that talk about collapse seem totally certain it would collapse. You tell me how they could be certain it would collapse. One of them said "there is no way to stop it". How did he know this? We only found out in 2008 that the mechanism was the failure of column 79. if it hadn't failked there may have been no collapse, so how did this guy know there would be a critical failure leading to global collapse? Was he psychic?

You mean besides for
1. huge gash in the side of the building
2. a huge bulge in one of the corners that was increasing in size over time
3. what appears to be massive fires on numerous floors
4. because they had seen 2 other massive buildings collapse that day
5. They knew it was a steel framed building that was on fire, had been on fire for 8 hours and it was not fought and they know what happens to steel when it is in fires. (knowing so much in fact that it is part of firefighters officer tests)

So besides for those reasons... they had absolutely no reason to believe the building would collapse.

 

[Edx]

The firefighters do not agree with each other. Some say that EVERY floor was on fire, some use the phrase "fully involved", some say that several floors were on fire.

Therefore they are lying, incompetent or stupid right?

Not fair choices? Then give me another option.

Also, do ANY talk about minor or small fires? Find me any firefighter on that day that backs up that idea.

The ones that talk about collapse seem totally certain it would collapse.

With no dissenters either on or after 911 as well!

Not even when the building collapses do we have any that expressed any surprise!

You tell me how they could be certain it would collapse.One of them said "there is no way to stop it". How did he know this?

Therefore they are lying, incompetent or stupid right?

We only found out in 2008 that the mechanism was the failure of column 79. if it hadn't failked there may have been no collapse, so how did this guy know there would be a critical failure leading to global collapse? Was he psychic?

Therefore they are lying, incompetent or stupid right?

Lets just get this out the way before we talk about anything else.

 

[vinniem]

Therefore they are lying, incompetent or stupid right?

Not fair choices? Then give me another option.

Also, do ANY talk about minor or small fires? Find me any firefighter on that day that backs up that idea.



With no dissenters either on or after 911 as well!

Not even when the building collapses do we have any that expressed any surprise!



Therefore they are lying, incompetent or stupid right?



Therefore they are lying, incompetent or stupid right?

Lets just get this out the way before we talk about anything else.

Is John Schroeder, the firefighter, lying or incompetent or stupid?

 

[dtugg]

I see the lying twoofer still has no other choice.

 

[TruthersLie]

Is John Schroeder, the firefighter, lying or incompetent or stupid?

He is a hero who has not been given the correct information. Unfortunately he has become a poster boy for twoofers. It is really rather sad, and I think Gravy has fully explained his mistakes in his open letter to him.

Do I need to post the link AGAIN?

 

[Edx]

Is John Schroeder, the firefighter, lying or incompetent or stupid?

1. Thats nothing to do with WTC7

2. Turns out you are right! There is another option. Traumatised.

2.5. Are you going to claim that every single FDNY firefighter is traumatised into believing pretty much the exact opposite from what truthers claim about Building 7 not just at the time, not just when they did the interviews, but also nearly a decade later?

 

[vinniem]

1. Thats nothing to do with WTC7

2. Turns out you are right! There is another option. Traumatised.

2.5. Are you going to claim that every single FDNY firefighter is traumatised into believing pretty much the exact opposite from what truthers claim about Building 7 not just at the time, not just when they did the interviews, but also nearly a decade later?

I am claiming nothing of the sort. Perhaps you could stop building strawmen and explain how the FDNY knew for certain that 7 was coming down.

 

[dtugg]

I am claiming nothing of the sort. Perhaps you could stop building strawmen and explain how the FDNY knew for certain that 7 was coming down.

Because they know what they are talking about.

Now, why do you think they said and continue to say it came down due to fires? Were they in on it, incompetent, or stupid? And don't say that's a false choice fallacy unless you can come up with a different choice.

 

[twinstead]

I am claiming nothing of the sort. Perhaps you could stop building strawmen and explain how the FDNY knew for certain that 7 was coming down.

Why don't you ask them? I realize that actually deferring to those with more expertise than oneself is hard sometimes, but why can't you accept that these professionals, who were actually there that day, knew what they were talking about?

 

[Edx]

I am claiming nothing of the sort. Perhaps you could stop building strawmen and explain how the FDNY knew for certain that 7 was coming down.

Its not a strawman, I'm asking you if that's your position.

So if you're not saying they were all traumatised, please then can you tell me if you believe they are either liars, stupid or incompetent?

Come on, either give me another option or tell me which it is.

 

[Arus808]

Don't think so, Duh-bunker.

then it can't be a false choice fallacy, pd---- truther.

 

[BigAl]

I am claiming nothing of the sort. Perhaps you could stop building strawmen and explain how the FDNY knew for certain that 7 was coming down.

Because the characteristics of steel structures on fire has been taught in fire school for decades. Steel structures collapse if the fire isn't fought and contained.

Because the NY Fire Dept deals with building collapse all the time and has people trained in anticipating such events.

Because FDNY had structure experts watching WTC7 with instruments designed to detect tilt. WTC7 was show tilt as early as 2PM.

Cite:

FDNY Chief Hayden explains how they knew that WTC7 was beginning to collapse as early as 2:00PM.

FDNY Chief Hayden sighting it with a surveyor's transit: .. we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o'clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o'clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/hayden.html​

 

[A W Smith]

Is John Schroeder, the firefighter, lying or incompetent or stupid?

What does John Schroeders opinion have to do with building seven, truther?

When John Schroeder claims the north tower collapsed before the south tower. Was he lying, incompetent or stupid, truther?