• 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.

Split From Dick Oliver thread

I'm just going to point out here that Silverstein's lease was for 99 years so I think it's safe to say that it was assumed that the buildings could stand for at least that long barring some unforeseen incident. Truthers might (and I do mean might) have a point if the attacks happened after the buildings were generating a net loss for a few years and would most likely continue to do so for the rest of the lease (in other words Arson writ large) but this was nowhere near the case on 9/11/01. Silverstein basically collected 1 months rent from the tenants and has lost money on the deal ever since then even when you count in the insurance settlements and liberty bonds.

Worst.Arsonist.Ever!
 
Profanz said:
Yeah that's right. Not. You people really are lame. You think I can't read how you people got your butts kicked before and who did it? Is everyone who comes here and makes you cry the same person? How pathetic. Maybe I'm this guy too.

This was the first known instance of fire causing the total collapse of a tall building,

“Our study found that the fires in WTC 7, which were uncontrolled but otherwise similar to fires experienced in other tall buildings, caused an extraordinary event,”

Is that your story or not? First time ever. Never before. Never again. Give it up. Last child, Apollo, Pdoh, zensack , countless others are all the same person. Sleep tight. I guess you're all Dr. Adequate, enigma, pomero, bannanaman. Maybe I should just start accusing you all of being those people every time I'm getting owned. The problem is that wouldn't be very often around here.

You got a problem? Tell it to forum management.
Click to expand...

Until Columbus sailed across the ocean it had never happened before.
 
alienentity said:
Illogical. By this denial nothing could ever happen for the first time.

Ignores the actual causality of the building collapses. Presumes (incorrectly) that all official inquiries are fake, without understanding the actual engineering analysis.

That's a basic logical fallacy protected by layers of denial.

Requires denial of these basic facts:

1) Large fires existed in WTC1, 2 and 7
2) Fires were not fought with water
3) Spray-on insulation was damaged or completely destroyed in areas which were then subjected to fire.
4) Steel structure can be weakened by fire, esp. if insulation is removed or compromised.
5) Conditions for failure of buildings did exist.
6) Those circumstances were sufficient to cause global collapse of 3 buildings in one day.

Avoidance of this basic fact: Steel buildings can fail due to fire.

The abstract concept that nothing which hasn't happened already can happen in the future is irrelevant to the actual circumstances of 9/11.
It is also irrelevant to engineering. Failure can happen in ways which are not fully anticipated.

Those points are at the heart of your inability/unwillingness to accept reality.
Click to expand...

That is a quote by NIST WTC Lead Investigator Shyam Sunder you are calling illogical. Good Job.
 
Profanz said:
That is a quote by NIST WTC Lead Investigator Shyam Sunder you are calling illogical. Good Job.
Click to expand...

So he said nothing that hasn't happened before can ever happen? Well, guess what? If he did, it still is illogical. You know what else it is? Stupid. Oh, and absolutely wrong, as well as being total nonsense.

Yet you seem to think it's true. You know how I ask people if they like looking stupid? I don't need to ask you that. I already know the answer.
 
Josarhus said:
Probably, but the point is that there is a first for everything, so arguing that things can not happen because it didn't happen before, is lame.
Click to expand...

Probably, but we're not just talking about the first time. We're talking about the only time. Don't hold your breath waiting for the next time.
 
Profanz said:
Probably, but we're not just talking about the first time. We're talking about the only time. Don't hold your breath waiting for the next time.
Click to expand...

Yup. Since the specifics in WTC1/2/7 that contributed to the deaths and collapse were unique to those buildings and the codes have been changed to make sure they won't be repeated, we won't see anything like 9/11 again.

The building codes have been changed based on lessons learned in the WTC1/2/7 collapses.

WTC1/2 and WTC7 were in their own ways absolutly unique buildings.

Application of cantilever beams will change greatly based on the WTC7 collapse.

Emergency egress will be improved based on what failed to work in WTC1/2​

I'm not an architect. I assume that there are hundreds of other changes but the above are the big ones.
 
Last edited:
BigAl said:
Yup. Since the specifics in WTC1/2/7 that contributed to the deaths and collapse were unique to those buildings and the codes have been changed to make sure they won't be repeated, we won't see anything like 9/11 again.

The building codes have been changed based on lessons learned in the WTC1/2/7 collapses.

WTC1/2 and WTC7 were in their own ways absolutly unique buildings.

Application of cantilever beams will change greatly based on the WTC7 collapse.
​
Emergency egress will be improved based on what failed to work in WTC1/2

I'm not an architect. I assume that there are hundreds of other changes but the above are the big ones.
Click to expand...

The buildings were not unique. It's how they are claimed to have fallen that is unique.
 
Profanz said:
The buildings were not unique. It's how they are claimed to have fallen that is unique.
Click to expand...

You've been unable to name a similar building. That would be Tube-within-a-tube design and/or long-span cantilever beams.

Please, put up of shut up.

It's possible that the tower previously known as Sears in Chicago shares design characteristics. Take this as a hint and go some to googleing and try to find a quote that confirms this.
 
Last edited:
BigAl said:
You've been unable to name a similar building. That would be Tube-within-a-tube design and/or long-span cantilever beams.

Please, put up of shut up.

It's possible that the tower previously known as Sears in Chicago shares design characteristics. Take this as a hint and go some to googleing and try to find a quote that confirms this.
Click to expand...

NIST admitted that the unique design did not contribute to the bldg's collapse. It has been and will always be nothing but a fire theory.
 
RedIbis said:
NIST admitted that the unique design did not contribute to the bldg's collapse. It has been and will always be nothing but a fire theory.
Click to expand...


Sundar says WTC7's long spans were the failure point. Long spans would be an aspect of the building's design. Changes to building codes will make sure this design isn't repeated.

You are correct in that had there not been a fire or firefighters had been able to put water on the fire, the building would have probably survived.

The heat from these uncontrolled fires caused thermal expansion of the steel beams on the lower floors of the east side of WTC 7, damaging the floor framing on multiple floors. Eventually, a girder on Floor 13 lost its connection to a critical interior column that provided support for the long floor spans on the east side of the building. The displaced girder and other local fire-induced damage caused Floor 13 to collapse, beginning a cascade of floor failures down to the fifth floor. Many of these floors had already been at least partially weakened by the fires in the vicinity of the critical column. This collapse of floors left the critical column unsupported over nine stories.
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc082108.html
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Profanz said:
That is a quote by NIST WTC Lead Investigator Shyam Sunder you are calling illogical. Good Job.
Click to expand...

Let me clarify, so you can dodge your own assertion some more:

You are claiming that something which has never happened before cannot happen at all.

Is that not what your claim is?

And stop dodging the previous questions and challenges, or be prepared to be written off as an empty-headed loon.

I'll give you one more try, then you're going on ignore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom