Christopher 7 --- C7 & C4

[Christopher7]

Chris, your "squibs" would like a word with you.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/879045c43ec6c7bf4.jpg​

Maybe some day you'll stop to think about why these brilliant demolitions experts chose, as you posit, to risk placing charges where they were absolutely unnecessary.

Do you ever stop to THINK, Chris?

All the time Gravy.

Neither of us knows exactly what was necessary to bring WTC 7 straight down into a pile of rubble.

 

[Coritani]

All the time Gravy.

Neither of us knows exactly what was necessary to bring WTC 7 straight down into a pile of rubble.

Huh. So, the perps stuck a bunch of explosives in the top SW corner (remember, CFs are always saying it was blown out from the bottom), for no reason, and then detonated them after they detonated the rest of the building.

For no reason.

 

[Christopher7]

You're making my point, Chris. The only thing that makes you think it was a CD is the fact that you've ONLY seen high-rise buildings collapse because of CDs. You have no basis for comparison,

There is no basis for comparison because fire has never caused a global collapsed before or since 9/11.

For comparison we have:

the Meridian Plaza [38 story] burned for 18 hours and it did not collapse.

1 New York Plaza [50 story] burned for 6 hours and it did not collapse.

The Caracas Tower [56 story] burned for 17 hours and it did not collapse.

 

[beachnut]

There is no basis for comparison because fire has never caused a global collapsed before or since 9/11.

For comparison we have:

the Meridian Plaza [38 story] burned for 18 hours and it did not collapse.

Fire was fought and put out! Show me One Meridian Plaza today.

All the fires you presented were fought. End of comparison. Fires not fought can lead to collapse. Every real fireman knows there is danger of collapse in a fire. Why are you not as smart as firemen?

 

[Christopher7]

Huh. So, the perps stuck a bunch of explosives in the top SW corner (remember, CFs are always saying it was blown out from the bottom), for no reason, and then detonated them after they detonated the rest of the building.

For no reason.

How the F am i supposed to know?

Your other point is better.

After viewing the squib vid frame by frame, i can see where you are justified to doubt the validity of the squibs, if you were of a mind to do so.

 

[Pardalis]

Chris, why don't you wait for the NIST final report?

 

[Christopher7]

http://www.nist.gov/admin/foia/foia.htm

Then you will raise the 13,000 dollars ?

Or are you just blowing smoke ?

I put in a request for the photographs of WTC 7

I might be able to buy that much

You can ask for an estimate before you buy

Info. at:

http:www.nist.gov/admin/foia/foia.htm

 

[Coritani]

How the F an i supposed to know?

Your other point is better.

After viewing the squib vid frame by frame, i can see where you are justified to doubt the validity of the squibs, if you were of a mind to do so.

You should know these things. After all, you are accusing people of mass murder here. Don't forget that.

 

[Christopher7]

Chris, why don't you wait for the NIST final report?

Because i have found a serious mistake in the current government report that has led a lot of people to believe that there was this

huge gouge, 100' high by 60' to 80' wide and 30' to 40' deep

This was the most serious reported damage to WTC 7 and it is a misinterpretation of damage described by others.


If you want to live in tomorrowland, you may.


You guys used to love that Progress Report so much, now you say

"it's two and a half years old, wait until the final report comes out"

 

[Christopher7]

You should know these things. After all, you are accusing people of mass murder here. Don't forget that.

I am still learning all these things. WTF do you think i'm here for.

Are you capable of learning anything new?


I know that what i am saying is very grave.

I understand your anger.

Understand mine.

 

[Belz...]

For comparison we have:

the Meridian Plaza [38 story] burned for 18 hours and it did not collapse.

1 New York Plaza [50 story] burned for 6 hours and it did not collapse.

The Caracas Tower [56 story] burned for 17 hours and it did not collapse.

Wow. You're making my point again. You're using non-events as proof that another event couldn't happen.

There is no basis for comparison because fire has never caused a global collapsed before or since 9/11.

You are not ignorant, sir. You are dishonest. I've told you more than once that a giant skyscraper collapsed near 7 WTC and damaged it. Your claim that "fire" never caused this or that, ignoring the physical damage to the building and other circumstances (diesel tank, construction, etc.) leading to the collapse shows that you have no interest in the truth, but prefer to cling to your preconceived fantasies.

After viewing the squib vid frame by frame, i can see where you are justified to doubt the validity of the squibs, if you were of a mind to do so.

Which you're not ?

Because i have found a serious mistake in the current government report that has led a lot of people to believe that there was this

huge gouge, 100' high by 60' to 80' wide and 30' to 40' deep

This was the most serious reported damage to WTC 7 and it is a misinterpretation of damage described by others.

So you haven't seen this ?

 

[A W Smith]

answer to "Its never happened before!!" logic

Name another suspension bridge that has failed like the Tacoma Narrows

 

[Pardalis]

Because i have found a serious mistake in the current government report

Yeah but they, the NIST's scientists, have access to much more information and evidence than you, simple lay person whith his computer.

I'd trust the final NIST report over your observations ANYTIME.

 

[jaydeehess]

All the time Gravy.

Neither of us knows exactly what was necessary to bring WTC 7 straight down into a pile of rubble.

Well this thread was started because you stated that you believe that it was brought down by demolitions yet for the most part you still refuse to tell us what about the collapse causes you to believe that. For the most part all you have done is say what there is that is not known.

Known:
- mechanical damage to the structure by WTC 1 debris, in some places this is major damage that is quite well known to have occurred and in others it can be inferred to be major due to glimpses through the smoke in photographs and by the eyewitness reports of FF's there at the time.

- Fires that started relatively small but due to their not being suppressed grew until the entire building was filled with smoke due to the fires on many floors.

- the building housed several diesel fuel tanks

-the collapse originated in the column structure below the east penthouse which fell into the center of the building first.

- the collapse progressed west from the origin along the center of the building.

- the building 'kinked' along a vertical plane that runs through the position of the column structure that failed first.

Now Chris, what in the above causes you to believe that the collapse was caused by explosives that were placed in order to bring the building down,
and/or
what additional evidence do you have that enables you to believe as you say you do?

 

[jaydeehess]

Name another suspension bridge that has failed like the Tacoma Narrows

,,,, more to the point name one that did so prior to the collapse of the Tacoma Narrows bridge.

 

[jaydeehess]

Because i have found a serious mistake in the current government report that has led a lot of people to believe that there was this

No, you have found what you characterize as a serious mistake even though the very 'error' you point to in no way affects the preliminarily derived sequence of collapse.

Your only point is that some people would read into the report something that may not have been the case on 9/11/01 and then you went so far as to suggest that it was deliberatly done in such a way as to have some people read it that way.

 

[Christopher7]

Well this thread was started because you stated that you believe that it was brought down by demolitions yet for the most part you still refuse to tell us what about the collapse causes you to believe that. For the most part all you have done is say what there is that is not known.

For the most part i have been answering posts.

The primary evidence is the video that shows the penthouse collapsing, thus creating a void so the east and west walls could fall inward.
Then the rest of the center falls just before the outer walls to draw them in.
The result is the implosion of WTC 7 and the debris pile is mostly within the original footprint of the building.
[It would be impossible to get all the debris to fall within the original footprint]

 

[Belz...]

The primary evidence is the video that shows the penthouse collapsing, thus creating a void so the east and west walls could fall inward.

So the evidence that it was controlled was that it collapsed ? You're not getting any better at this, are you ?

 

[jaydeehess]

For the most part i have been answering posts.

......... the video that shows the penthouse collapsing, thus creating a void so the east and west walls could fall inward.
Then the rest of the center falls just before the outer walls to draw them in. ]

Well we all know this much

The result is the implosion of WTC 7 and the debris pile is mostly within the original footprint of the building.

No, the result is that the core of the building failed first. You still have shown no evidence that this was caused by any explosives being placed on the columns in question. All you have now stated is that NIST was correct in their assesment of the sequence of collapse.

It would be impossible to get all the debris to fall within the original footprint

Which it did not! A couple of surrounding buildings suffered major damage. Any debris that fell to the south hit WTC 6(or 5, I forget now) and so any further damage that occured there would not be particularily visible unless the parts of WTC 7 that hit it remained intact and recognizable.


So far now the 'evidence' that has you convinced that this was a controlled demolition is that there is no evidence and that the building collapsed from the center first.

Is that really all you have?

Really?

 

[jaydeehess]

It would be impossible to get all the debris to fall within the original footprint

That's 30 West Broadway with a substantial bit of damage from #7. This illustrates that the east part of the building fell somewhat NE. Photos from the south show that the western portion fell to the south (into Vesey Street and onto what was left of WTC 6)