• 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.

Continuation: 'What about building 7?'

Dave Rogers said:
They appear to have some reddish regions and some grey regions, which we all recognise as characteristic of military grade nanothermite.

Dave
Click to expand...

Notice the missing turn signal on the left, definitely an indication of an inside job,
no way a piece of fracturing steel from the blade could have been catapulted that far to
Bust it off without violating the laws of physics.

Wish the government would stop these CDs soon the whole country will have weld and machine shops, to repair all this CDed steel at 100- 150 per hour, and that will be expensive,
Bankrupt farmers and lead to The new world order having full control of the worlds food supply.

We have to solve this mistery before we run out of strawberries, or no more strawberry cheesecake.
 
Tony Szamboti said:
You might be having trouble following along.

I am taking about the dust being very heavy over the plan of the building. There weren't many survivors there. The dust would have been thinned by orders of magnitude away from the plan of the building.
Click to expand...

Ok let's examine your claim:
Fire in offices on several floors;
Then collapse ensues;
Drywall is crushed creating dust;
Dust hits burning office material;
Building is collapsing and material is ejected;

Big question then:
For how many milliseconds is the burning office material coated with dust before it is ejected and reaches a point where the dust is no longer dense enough to cut off combustion?
 
chrismohr said:
Tony, Here is what Building 7 looked like at the moment the debris from the Tower collapse smashed against it. Debris top to bottom, left to right, from a building whose smoke plumes were miles long. Come on, how can you seriously propose that such a catastrophic collision as this be completely without any heat, when an overheated coffemaker was enough to bring down a big piece of TU Delft?
Click to expand...

I spotted the problem. ;)
 
Belz... said:
*Qu'est-ce que.
Click to expand...
I am absolutely sure gypsum works better than wet mud, rain and a 30
Minute flash flood, to stop fire.

[IMGW=480]http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj132/chainsawprof/20150327_103843_zps1fqlbb10.jpg[/IMGW]

Especially hot gypsum dust that could cause paper to spontaneously ignite on contact, DA
Gypsum dry does not conduct heat well, and can remain quite hot, hot enough to ignite paper,
Without a flame or spark.

Sorry just can not take this amount of truther dumb seriously.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Crazy Chainsaw said:
Just one of the emergency generating units shorting out could have created the fire, and gypsum soaked in diesel fuel from the ruptured supply line on the roof tanks would certainly produce enough fuel vapor to ignite.

The idea of arson in world trade 7 is a Joke tony is playing on himself.
Click to expand...

Have you seen the drawings for the emergency generator system?
I will try to look them out for you later if not. Also most of the fuel oil was recovered and there were non return valves on the header tank feeds. There is good reason why NIST abandoned the fuel oil theory relatively early on. With good reason.
 
gerrycan said:
Have you seen the drawings for the emergency generator system?
I will try to look them out for you later if not. Also most of the fuel oil was recovered and there were non return valves on the header tank feeds. There is good reason why NIST abandoned the fuel oil theory relatively early on. With good reason.
Click to expand...

That's nice. Do you agree with Tony that gypsum would have doused all burning material impacting WTC7? If so, with what justification?
 
gerrycan said:
More like the records of the recovered oil showed up.
Click to expand...
If memory serves, about 18,000 gallons was unacounted for. They found no fuel in the soil afterwards so it is assumed to have burned but, did not contribute to the collapse directly.
 
Last edited:
LSSBB said:
That's nice. Do you agree with Tony that gypsum would have doused all burning material impacting WTC7? If so, with what justification?
Click to expand...

I think it's a fair point yes. Surely the dust would act to suppress the fires to some extent. By the time it's dust the gypsum sheet dust would lose its water content quickly if heated and goes back to plaster powder.
It's difficult to say how much would have fallen into the building but it's accepted that there was an inch or so on ground much further out than wtc7 was from the towers.
Is it the quantity of dust in the building or it's ability to suppress fire that you are disputing?
 
gerrycan said:
Have you seen the drawings for the emergency generator system?
I will try to look them out for you later if not. Also most of the fuel oil was recovered and there were non return valves on the header tank feeds. There is good reason why NIST abandoned the fuel oil theory relatively early on. With good reason.
Click to expand...
Nist abandoned the fuel tank explosion in the basement,
Not the fuel line leakage from the tanks mounted
On the roof.

The fuel tank in the basement was found intact
the roof tanks were known to have leaked.
 
Crazy Chainsaw said:
Nist abandoned the fuel tank explosion in the basement,
Not the fuel line leakage from the tanks mounted
On the roof.

The fuel tank in the basement was found intact
the roof tanks were known to have leaked.
Click to expand...
By "roof". Do you mean the header tanks on the ceiling of the generator rooms? The were none at the top of the building.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom