Care to Comment

[achimspok]

How about you be the first truther in history to offer an alternative hypothesis that answers these questions better than the "official story" (whatever the hell that is)?

...but the official story has no answers to not one of these questions. I could poop and it would be better. What do you think?

 

[pgimeno]

I cite:
Conspiracists misrepresent WTC 7's condition
"We’ve already seen an aerial view of the “small pile” left by WTC 7 and the damage it did to 30 West Broadway. Here’s a view from the ground. Keep in mind that WTC 7’s basement was 5 stories deep."
Who is right? You or the Anti-Twoof site?

Me. This was discussed here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=120183&page=2

There was no basement, face it.

Who told you that the cores remained standing?
Let's see! In the case of WTC1 less than 2 rows of columns remained for about 20 seconds (row 500 + row 600) and the east half of it fell to the east when the collapse reached some low enough level to allow it. The upper tip of the western half was 77 floors tall.

Interesting. You forgot to discuss the larger WTC2 core portion that stood for a while, though.

So there are pretty possibilities. You could place a lot of stuff in the basement to redistribute the loads to the members. And then you place some tiny noodling cracker (without noise) in the 77th floor along row 1000 for example. You know that is the floor with elevator pits and toilets called "lower escalator" below the skylobby and above the MER floors. No one ever needed the lower escalator. It was dead space but famous for the huge dust jets in the west.

That doesn't correspond with what other people from The 9/11™ say about collapse progression. They say no previous building damage was necessary to the part below the impacts.

You are forgetting also to address the fact that people were burnt in the basement, but they were not in pieces. They weren't affected by a shock wave. The "explosion" reported by the famous liar William Rodriguez (or, in his own words that very day, "like a rumble, like moving furniture in a masive way", you know, first-time testimony is the most uncontaminated of them all, they say), the "explosion" he reported, I say, was most likely the effect of the plane impact on the foundations. Interestingly enough, he didn't tell NIST about such an explosion but he instead associated it with the impact.

hypothetical scenario:
The plane hit and you deceit to noodle e.g. 702, 802, 707, 806. You could say it was some jet fuel in the local shafts.
Then you let the tower burn for a while. Maybe you wait for some apparent peak of fire development or so or you wait that most people get out. Next you noodling row 1000 at the 77th floor - column by column - maybe you start in the center 1004+1005 next 1003+1006...

That's plain stupid. You wait for long enough and the ever increasing strain on the columns will finally make the building go down.

No, that's not the answer. Noodling will cause absolutely nothing. Even the truck bomb 1993 in the WTC basement caused no seismic activity - nothing - zero. You will get a hard time to generate seismic waves.

Mmm... ok, I'll buy that for now.

But while we're on it, was the bomb unheard by the people on the street, at ground level?

But that point is nevertheless pretty interesting. Could you explain these two tiny seismic spikes prior to the WTC7 collapse? You know, the one in the moment the building started to sway the other about 1 second before the east penthouse collapsed. Any idea?

Not at the moment but that's interesting indeed. That could prove internal collapses.

 

[pgimeno]

Somehow it is always funny where a discussion about the WTC7 free fall measurement leads at JREF. I should go back and count how many replied on that.

...déjà vu! ...a strawman for a strawman report? Sounds like a strawman argument.

But maybe you can show me where I find some explanations in the report???
1) Why all the early fires died down without spreading?
2) What ignited the later fires?
3) Why burnt the area around column 79 much longer than any other area (at least in the simulation)?
4) Why is there (according to the report) no evidence for any fire in the east half of the SEC floor after 3:13 while the simulation burns on for 2 more hours?
5) How is it possible that the south wall of the East Penthouse collapsed prior to the north wall?
6) How is it possible that the East penthouse started in free fall?
7) How is it possible that the West penthouse started to move in free fall?
8) How is it possible that the moving part of the west Penthouse descended horizontally as a 3x3 columns section?
9) Why did the middle section of the core took the Perimeter down a little faster than free fall?
10) why provided NIST an obviously false measurement?
11) Why is there no original soundtrack available for this video?
12) What caused the darting flames shortly prior to the collapse?
13) What caused the seismic spike that apparently started the building sway?
14) Why did the building sway to the west while a column in the east started to buckle?
15) Why did Mr. Sunder know nothing about witnesses who heard "BAABOOOOM" sounds and felt the earth is shaking?
16) How was it possible that the Interim report exactly predicted the outcome of the FEA (column 79 + 5 floors unsupported column length + steel temperature at least 150°C + at which time?)
17) How many connections had to fail to produce 5 unsupported stories?
18) How many connections had to fail to allow the east penthouse to fall at free fall acceleration inside the building?
19) Why is there no observable dust from these (may be thousands) of failures?
20) What caused the hot spots and is there any example in the history of mankind for some similar effect?
21) Is there any photographic evidence for a fire on 3 floors one above the other in the east half of the building after 3:13pm?
22) How is it possible that the simulated steel temperature is rising until after 5pm?

Let's see your strawmans!

Speaking of derailing...

 

[TSR]

It merely proves that NIST had no clue how to measure, right?

.
Wrong.

Unless you'd care to elaborate? Exactly what errors in measurement can you document?
.

 

[Toke]

Odd, I ask for examples of steel buildings that have burned and not collapsed.
What I get is one where all the steel bits exposed to fire are gone.

I will stick to the "steel buildings tend to fail in fires" theory.

 

[Andy_Ross]

If an aircraft didn't crash into the pentagon where did it go?
Where are all the passengers and crew that were aboard?

 

[fess]

But nobody knows if he talked to a fire fighter, right?

Wrong, try researching at little bit.

...but besides what he maybe meant or not meant the core simply fell down.

But what about the explosives?

 

[achimspok]

Me. This was discussed here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=120183&page=2

There was no basement, face it.

Fine, you are right. So we have a problem to use RDX?

Interesting. You forgot to discuss the larger WTC2 core portion that stood for a while, though.

The WTC2 core portion that stood for a while was similar or smaller. It was essentially the SE quarter of the core below the impact damage.

That doesn't correspond with what other people from The 9/11™ say about collapse progression. They say no previous building damage was necessary to the part below the impacts.

Depends on what you plan to initiate the collapse, right? So if they say no previous building damage was necessary then they probably are up to some mischief at the impact floor??? Personally I wouldn't risk the charges by some pilots failure.
Oh wait, AA11 hit the center column at 490mph almost perpendicular while banking.

You are forgetting also to address the fact that people were burnt in the basement, but they were not in pieces. They weren't affected by a shock wave.

If they were affected by a shock wave then they would be in pieces. Is that what you like to say? The problem is, you can not ask the witnesses in pieces. You probably wouldn't find any pieces in that chaos without light and in danger of the next BANG. Who mentioned the guy with the hanging skin? Have you read about the little dirt piles the fire fighters had to step over until they realized they are stepping over people? I'm pretty sure that we know just a very small piece of that horror - like seen through a key hole it the door of the theater.
At B3 as steel door was winkled up like a foil. Do you think that the man next to that door used that exit? Find me some witness who SAW what happened at B2 and B3 and survived in one piece!

The "explosion" reported by the famous liar William Rodriguez (or, in his own words that very day, "like a rumble, like moving furniture in a masive way", you know, first-time testimony is the most uncontaminated of them all, they say), the "explosion" he reported, I say, was most likely the effect of the plane impact on the foundations. Interestingly enough, he didn't tell NIST about such an explosion but he instead associated it with the impact.

Any source? I never dealt that much with WR. What about the tourists who thought it was a subway collision? We still have the problem that all 3 express shafts are blocked by the cabins at B1. That's the level of Willy.

That's plain stupid. You wait for long enough and the ever increasing strain on the columns will finally make the building go down.

Do they? I thought the floors had to sag for at least 3 meters in 20 minutes of fire to pull the perimeter 55 inches inwards by catenary forces. Hey, NIST did a full scale with max load and 2 hours fire.

Mmm... ok, I'll buy that for now.

But while we're on it, was the bomb unheard by the people on the street, at ground level?

Sounds like a subway collision? Sounds like crashing elevators? Sounds like exploding elevators? Sounds like explosions? You get the full range from the witnesses.

Not at the moment but that's interesting indeed. That could prove internal collapses.

It could indeed but the internal collapse has to reach the ground first. Probably it wound generate a shallow envelope curve like the east penthouse but at a much smaller amplitude.

 

[achimspok]

Speaking of derailing...

Don't think so.

 

[achimspok]

Wrong.

Wrong.

Unless you'd care to elaborate? Exactly what errors in measurement can you document?
.

Let's say half a pixel, probably below. The tendency of the data allows further conclusions. And we can repeat the measurement a hundred times along any pixel you want. And please read carefully what I wrote about symmetrical averaging.
Finally we have a curve representing the horizontal height of the roofline as a result of a straight line between east and west. And we have the raw data for the perspective bullsh** NIST did. That NIST "measurement" is still conclusive regarding the onset of the west penthouse collapse. ...but that's not what NIST is mentioned anywhere, right?
It's free fall from one frame to another.
Btw, what is the failure NIST gave for their measurement?

 

[achimspok]

Odd, I ask for examples of steel buildings that have burned and not collapsed.
What I get is one where all the steel bits exposed to fire are gone.

I will stick to the "steel buildings tend to fail in fires" theory.

Show me the usual pile!

 

[R.Mackey]

That's a concrete building, not a steel building.

And the fire was fought, unlike the WTC.

Don't be so transparently ridiculous.

 

[TSR]

Wrong.

.
Let's see your work
.

Let's say half a pixel, probably below.

.
Except that NIST didn't use pixel measurements.

Try again, and actually *cite* an incorrect measurement this time.
.

 

[achimspok]

If an aircraft didn't crash into the pentagon where did it go?
Where are all the passengers and crew that were aboard?

You are obviously too slow. A plane crashed into the Pentagon - a pretty fast one, pretty close to the ground, pretty close to obstacles like a VDOT mast and a hotel. Nevertheless, I took all of it just to reach the west wing.
It would be that easy to fly into the south wing but... That's what beginners like Hani would do, right?

 

[achimspok]

.
Let's see your work
.

You have to go some post backwards.

.
Except that NIST didn't use pixel measurements.

Try again, and actually *cite* an incorrect measurement this time.
.

5.4 sec
Read the NIST report.
Btw, they had no chance to do anything else like pixel measurement. They used a video.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

Concerning flight 77 and the Pentagon, which I'd have thought to be off-topic for this thread:

That's what the FDR says. It's pretty fast for a Boeing but the difficult part is the last part. That last part seems to be truncated for any reason because technically the FDR records all 4 seconds one frame with several subframes. There are data in the subframes with regulations for the max delay between measurement and recording. Nevertheless, it appears like a little more that 4 seconds are missing.

The missing seconds have been found:
http://www.cesura17.net/~will/Ephemera/Sept11/Software/

 

[achimspok]

That's a concrete building, not a steel building.

And the fire was fought, unlike the WTC.

Don't be so transparently ridiculous.

Show me the concrete! Is it in the core? So was it the WTC core that collapsed because it was steel? I thought it was the perimeter bowed by the sagged (concrete) floors. Sorry, I was totally wrong.

 

[TSR]

5.4 sec

.
Apparently you are unfamiliar with the concept of a citation: What publication and page is this, and what is it a measurement of.

And since your claim was that NIST's measurements are incorrect, what specifically is wrong with this particular one?
.

 

[R.Mackey]

Show me the concrete! Is it in the core? So was it the WTC core that collapsed because it was steel? I thought it was the perimeter bowed by the sagged (concrete) floors. Sorry, I was totally wrong.

Oh, very well, since you asked so nicely.




Here's a picture as it was under construction. See anything missing? That's because they haven't yet poured most of the concrete. But you can see some of it opposite the crane.

The question you should be asking yourself is, if you can be so wrong about this, what else are you wrong about? It's not like it would have been hard for you to find this information on your own. Thirty seconds would have sufficed!

 

[achimspok]

Concerning flight 77 and the Pentagon, which I'd have thought to be off-topic for this thread:

The missing seconds have been found:
http://www.cesura17.net/~will/Ephemera/Sept11/Software/

Thanks for the link. I already know a lot of Warrens great work. I will see if there is something new. I always wondered why the data Warren discovered are completely displaced regarding the subframecounter compared to the NTSB readout.