Some simple Tower 7 questions

[TellyKNeasuss]

The building withstood the minor damage and the minor fires up until the moment when the entire structure collapsed, almost flush, and almost at a free fall speed.

Personally, I would consider a bulge in 4 floors to be more than minor damage, but then again I'm not a fireman.

If the tip of the flame is directed towards the fireproofing yes, so what contents could have surrounded the structural beams in tower 7 that would have directed enough heat straight towards them, and also burn long enough to actually weaken the beam.

So I could safely walk thru a burning building and as long as I avoided stepping directly over the tip of a flame I wouldn't even break a sweat?

 

[Bell]

Where are the flames?

 

[maccy]

I am a fireman

I say that it's obvious you're not a fireman.

 

[Trigood]

Why are you guys wasting your time with this idiot? From looking at his posts I doubt any of you really think he is looking for answers since his mind is already made up. Stop giving credibility to a moron.

We will stop when it is no longer fun, Enigma. We be cool.

By the way, I love your chosen name. I used to know another (I assume) Enigma, back in the good ol' days of Usenet. She was neato coolo....

 

[Submersible]

Oh, my God. Okay, Submersible, now I'm going to insist that you read the WTC 7 section of NIST NCSTAR 1-8: Emergency Response Operations http://wtc.nist.gov/oct05NCSTAR1-8index.htm

Then read the first responder accounts I've already referred you to.

Then come back here and blame the FDNY if you're that stupid.

Oh, my God, Gravy, go look at the pages you referred me to. They do not contain first responder accounts. And I'll waste my time reading a NIST report if you go read Alex Jones Prison Planet forum.
Haven't we been through this before, it seems you have a habit of responding to me without reading my replies to you? I read your little homework paper and you appear to be competent, then you imply that I am blaming the FDNY when I clearly stated the opposite. How about this, go back and look at how stupid your replies to me are.

Glenn B

No it isn't.

That photo was taken in the afternoon. The light grey smoke from dead centre of that photo is from GZ, the bulk of the dark smoke is from WTC7

According to njslim there were several buildings burning at the same site.

While most people only concentrate on WTC complex , buildings all around WTC site were on fire at World Financial Centers, Bankers Trust, 90 West
Street. FDNY had hands full. Listened all afternoon and into evening to
radio calls at my firehouse from adjacent FD fighting fires at World Financial
Centers - were on standby in case needed and were covering for them

btw, a good sized hardware store burning produces more smoke than you see in either one of those images.

Did you ever consider that the guys in charge did make such an assesment, but that they (being right there, and not just looking at pictures) decided it was too damaged to be worth saving? Isn't the fact that they chose to work on other buildings pretty good evidence that they believed, at that time, that WTC7 was damaged beyond hope? Don't you believe they must have been in a better position to make that call than any of us?

So if you believe they didn't have such information, why then did they make the call they did?

I understand the situation was beyond complicated, but they weren't shooting in the dark. I don't know why they made the call they did, according to ALL of the images I've seen so far the fires could have easily been extinguished. Compare the fires shown in the images that Senior'Gravy has in his paper to the fires burning above the 78th floor of the south tower.

Two hose lines are needed, Chief Orio Palmer says from an upper floor of the badly damaged south tower at the World Trade Center.

Lt. Joseph G. Leavey is heard responding: "Orio, we're on 78, but we're in the B stairway. Trapped in here. We got to put some fire out to get to you."

He was standing on a floor with burning jet fuel, so how much trouble would it have been to extinguish an office fire?

Time out !

 

[Bell]

Oh, my God, Gravy, go look at the pages you referred me to. They do not contain first responder accounts. And I'll waste my time reading a NIST report if you go read Alex Jones Prison Planet forum.
Haven't we been through this before, it seems you have a habit of responding to me without reading my replies to you? I read your little homework paper and you appear to be competent, then you imply that I am blaming the FDNY when I clearly stated the opposite. How about this, go back and look at how stupid your replies to me are.

Glenn B


According to njslim there were several buildings burning at the same site.



btw, a good sized hardware store burning produces more smoke than you see in either one of those images.




I understand the situation was beyond complicated, but they weren't shooting in the dark. I don't know why they made the call they did, according to ALL of the images I've seen so far the fires could have easily been extinguished. Compare the fires shown in the images that Senior'Gravy has in his paper to the fires burning above the 78th floor of the south tower.



He was standing on a floor with burning jet fuel, so how much trouble would it have been to extinguish an office fire?

Time out !

*pling*

 

[GlennB]

.....

The building withstood the minor damage and the minor fires up until the moment when the entire structure collapsed, almost flush, and almost at a free fall speed.

No it didn't.

The East mechanical penthouse fell into the building several seconds before global collapse.

It seems the metalwork holding it up suddenly ceased doing so, while several hundred tons of structure plunged into the building.

Why do you keep peddling incorrect information when the truth is freely available?

 

[GlennB]

Glenn B

According to njslim there were several buildings burning at the same site.

Who said there weren't ?
njslim lists one set (World Financial Centers, Bankers Trust, 90 West
Street.), you list WTC 1,2,3,4,5,6,7

Clearly, visibly, palpably, the bulk of that smoke is from WTC7. You can take in simple information from a photo, surely?

You getting panicky, Sub ? Slow down and stop defending an indefensible position. Take a rest.

 

[Submersible]

Where are the flames?

[qimg]http://www.newlondonfirefighters.org/scrapbookpage/firespage/447bankstreet/Bank01.jpg[/qimg]

If any are present at the time this picture was taken they are very small, due to the earlier free burning fire the contents of the structure have reached a superheated temperature and the level of O2 has dropped below the fire's ability to burn. You can see men on the roof preparing to ventillate the building, or maybe attack the fire through one of the openings on side of the structure. You can also see that they haven't busted all of the windows or door open because it would allow a sudden rush of O2 rich air to enter the building, feed the smoldering fire and cause a flashover if not a backdraft. More than likely a flashover in this case.

It's either that or they knocked it down with the master stream about 10-15 seconds before this image was taken as it vented from the roof. But it looks like the seed of the fire originates from the bottom floor.
I think my first answer was right.


*smooch*

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

Why are you guys wasting your time with this idiot? From looking at his posts I doubt any of you really think he is looking for answers since his mind is already made up. Stop giving credibility to a moron.

The longer that you drag out these kinds of people, the more opportunity you give them to show that they're frauds. Submersible has given pretty convincing evidence that he (or she) is not a fireman.

 

[Bell]

If any are present at the time this picture was taken they are very small, due to the earlier free burning fire the contents of the structure have reached a superheated temperature and the level of O2 has dropped below the fire's ability to burn. You can see men on the roof preparing to ventillate the building, or maybe attack the fire through one of the openings on side of the structure. You can also see that they haven't busted all of the windows or door open because it would allow a sudden rush of O2 rich air to enter the building, feed the smoldering fire and cause a flashover if not a backdraft. More than likely a flashover in this case.

It's either that or they knocked it down with the master stream about 10-15 seconds before this image was taken as it vented from the roof. But it looks like the seed of the fire originates from the bottom floor.
I think my first answer was right.


*smooch*

And you can tell all of this from one picture?
You should change your username to Supernatural.

*pling*

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

btw, a good sized hardware store burning produces more smoke than you see in either one of those images.

So the amount of smoke doesn't depend at all on what's burning and how complete the combustion is, just how big the fire is?

He was standing on a floor with burning jet fuel, so how much trouble would it have been to extinguish an office fire?

Time out !

STRAWMAN! Chief Palmer was referring to the 78th floor, the lowest floor to receive any direct damage. It was impacted only by the tip of a wing. The bulk of the fire was higher up.

 

[~enigma~]

The longer that you drag out these kinds of people, the more opportunity you give them to show that they're frauds. Submersible has given pretty convincing evidence that he (or she) is not a fireman.

As if it wasn't plain that he, she or it was a fake and an idiot after reading it's reply to me. Then again, it was obvious before that.

 

[Bell]

STRAWMAN! Chief Palmer was referring to the 78th floor, the lowest floor to receive any direct damage. It was impacted only by the tip of a wing. The bulk of the fire was higher up.

*sigh*

I really didn't want to comment on Das Boat's comment, but what the hell...
Lookit here, where's the 78th floot?

 

[Horatius]

I understand the situation was beyond complicated, but they weren't shooting in the dark. I don't know why they made the call they did, according to ALL of the images I've seen so far the fires could have easily been extinguished. Compare the fires shown in the images that Senior'Gravy has in his paper to the fires burning above the 78th floor of the south tower.

Exactly. IMAGES. Why do you assume your analysis of images is better than the analysis of all the people who were actually there? Who didn't have to rely on a random sampling of images taken by people who might not have known the most important things to be looking at, and who were almost certainly farther away from the building? Why don't you trust the judgement of the experts who were actually on the scene, and could evaluate those things that they thought were most important, and not only those things of which we have only a few images?

 

[Kent1]

*sigh*

I really didn't want to comment on Das Boat's comment, but what the hell...
Lookit here, where's the 78th floot?

[qimg]http://killtown.911review.org/images/wtc-gallery/nist1-5fd/6-32_wtc2-northeast-corner-exit.jpg[/qimg]

Yea, the Orio Palmer myth gets old after a while. I'm shocked they still pull that one out.
http://www.911myths.com/html/no_wtc2_inferno_.html
http://www.debunking911.com/fire.htm

 

[Gravy]

Oh, my God, Gravy, go look at the pages you referred me to. They do not contain first responder accounts.

I referred you to the many pages of those accounts in the paper I wrote.

And I'll waste my time reading a NIST report if you go read Alex Jones Prison Planet forum.

I'm very, very sorry that you think the NIST report on the WTC firefighting operations is a waste of time.

Just trolling then, submersible?

By the way, I'm quite familiar with Alex Jones' position on the FDNY and WTC 7. We had a little dust-up about it at Ground Zero. About me, Jones says,
“See, guys, this is all ‘straw man.’ We never said the firemen were involved. He just claimed we said it. He’s a liar! That’s what liars do. They build straw men.”

“Just like you heard it: he claimed we blamed the firemen. We never said that. He just made it up.”

“He blamed us for saying the firefighters were in on it.”

“He’s claiming I blame firefighters. ...And none of it’s true.”

“He set the subject, he made up that we blame the firefighters.”

Alex Jones’ PrisonPlanet.com headline:
Silverstein, FDNY Decided to “Pull WTC 7”

Prisonplanet.com headline:
People Died in WTC 7: This Makes Silverstein and the FDNY Guilty of AT LEAST Manslaughter

Alex Jones’ Infowars.com headline:
“World Trade Center 7 Imploded by Silverstein, FDNY And Others”

By the way, no one died at WTC 7. Jones got that wrong, too.

You continue to act like a little child with his fingers in his ears, submersible. Read the material I referred you to, then return with your specific objections. If you can't do at least that, then you're just trolling. It isn't mature to play games with a subject this serious.

 

[stateofgrace]

If any are present at the time this picture was taken they are very small, due to the earlier free burning fire the contents of the structure have reached a superheated temperature and the level of O2 has dropped below the fire's ability to burn. You can see men on the roof preparing to ventillate the building, or maybe attack the fire through one of the openings on side of the structure. You can also see that they haven't busted all of the windows or door open because it would allow a sudden rush of O2 rich air to enter the building, feed the smoldering fire and cause a flashover if not a backdraft. More than likely a flashover in this case.

It's either that or they knocked it down with the master stream about 10-15 seconds before this image was taken as it vented from the roof. But it looks like the seed of the fire originates from the bottom floor.
I think my first answer was right.


*smooch*

Really ? And you are actually a fireman ?

I’m not a fireman but I do know the difference between a brackdraft and a flashover, did they not teach you this a basic firefighting training?

Hint..... a flashover is caused not by an injection of new oxygen but when the atmosphere gets so hot it ignites, hence the term flash over, as the fire flashes over the top of which ever room it is in. A back draft on the other hand is when an oxygen starved fire is give a sudden injection of oxygen and ignites. Incidentally they are both classed as explosions, I bet you knew that also eh ?

 

[Gravy]

Yea, the Orio Palmer myth gets old after a while. I'm shocked they still pull that one out.
http://www.911myths.com/html/no_wtc2_inferno_.html
http://www.debunking911.com/fire.htm

It's important to note that the radio call Palmer made was at 9:52. The time of the much-reprinted NIST photo of the molten material pouring from the 80th floor, 2 stories above? 9:52.

CT's also don't bother to mention that numerous people were trapped in an elevator on the ST 78th floor after it was struck, and a Port Authority technician was there radioing for help for a long time. It wasn't a miracle that people were alive there. It was an enormous building and that was the lowest point where it was struck.

 

[twinstead]

Dude. Answer Gravy's posts