Merged Summing up the evidence against Controlled Demolition

[roundhead]

You have no idea what physics means. If only you would take a physics course and review your ideas with a teacher, you may stop exposing your ignorance on physics and fire.

One needs not be a physicist to know what the video imprint of a cd is, nor use a stopwatch, and make measurements.

 

[johnny karate]

A cd company would do exactly what we saw regarding 7, know its fine to remove the pile without study, because the piles existance is already factually accounted for.

And yet no demolition company has come forward to support Truther allegations. Do you think it's because they are all cowards the way you believe the FDNY to be cowards?

 

[johnny karate]

One needs not be a physicist to know what the video imprint of a cd is, nor use a stopwatch, and make measurements.

And yet no one within the legitimate scientific community has come forward to verify these seemingly simple calculations that prove 9/11 was an inside job. Do you think it's because they are all cowards the way you think the FDNY are cowards?

 

[Alt+F4]

I think all firefighting assets in NYC did a great job that day. The leadership at the highest levels is what i question. Many firefighters, as would be expected, were exasperated that they were pulled back, and the building roped off and allowed to burn.

Hundreds of department members were buried under the rubble of the WTC buildings. The FDNY's priority was rescue efforts there, not "exasperation" over a building that had been evacuated and where no one had died. You know nothing about firefighting, and even less about the events of 9/11.

 

[Mr. Skinny]

Oops, mis-read. Delete

 

[roundhead]

And yet in seven years none of these people have come forward to reveal what they witnessed in support of a controlled demolition theory. Do you believe it's because they're all cowards the way you believe the FDNY to be cowards?

Come forward to whom??

I am sure after noting the extreme trouble the state of NY went to so as to suppress firefighter and first responder statements, and tie these up in courts for years, with no reason whatoever, other than they flew in the face of the official narrative, and as such needed to be hidden from public view or else have to be uncomfortablally explained, discetion becomes the better part of valor.

 

[Alt+F4]

I am sure after noting the extreme trouble the state of NY went to so as to suppress firefighter and first responder statements, and tie these up in courts for years, with no reason whatoever, other than they flew in the face of the official narrative, and as such needed to be hidden from public view or else have to be uncomfortablally explained, discetion becomes the better part of valor.

What happened after The New York Times published the 503 accounts? Where was the new investigation? Where was the public outcry?

 

[johnny karate]

You keep stating as fact this coward issue, which is certainly unreferenceable with regards anything i have ever said, as though it were fact.

Of course it's a fact. And you denying it's a fact is a flat out lie.

First you said this:

Major Mike McCormack a civil air patrol pilot, who was the one who found the US flag in the rubble, and became a toxic air whistleblower(and got harassed for his troubles)....


"McCormack said that around 75% of police, firemen and rescue personnel that he had personally spoke with now believe there is a cover-up pertaining to 9/11 and that many had been threatened that "if they ever open their mouth their pensions are at risk."

Is he a liar?

And then this:

I stated they had been threatened, and posted a quote that supports my contention.

Please explain how stating that the members of the FDNY were coerced into silence doesn't imply cowardice on their part. Otherwise, keep quiet and take your medicine.

 

[beachnut]

One needs not be a physicist to know what the video imprint of a cd is, nor use a stopwatch, and make measurements.

The penthouse fell 8 seconds before the facade falls. The interior of WTC7 was damaged and missing! You are right a grade school education is all that is needed to understand WTC7, which is amazing how you can be so wrong and not have a clue.

The overall fall time was 40 percent greater than free fall time, and that is how a building would fall. If you had an understanding of physics you could understand it. Got Physics, no you got hearsay, lies and fantasy.

The fact is, if you understood physics you would not be making such stupid claims about WTC7.

 

[johnny karate]

Come forward to whom??

The press, law enforcement...

I am sure after noting the extreme trouble the state of NY went to so as to suppress firefighter and first responder statements, and tie these up in courts for years, with no reason whatoever, other than they flew in the face of the official narrative, and as such needed to be hidden from public view or else have to be uncomfortablally explained, discetion becomes the better part of valor.

Oh okay, so you think they're cowards too. Gotcha.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Did someone just reboot the topic?

Haven't we've been through this before? It's like Groundhog Day.

*sigh* If at first they don't succeed repeat until true. That's their motto -_-

Billowing clouds of dust are a characteristic of CD.

Controlling the rubble pile by pulling in the exterior columns to fall inward, are evidence of a sucessful CD

Deductive fallacy - Like saying Portland is in Maine, therefore it is the capital of Maine. Failed...
More accurately your first claim about the dust cloud is a false dilemma. Dust clouds are only possible with a controlled demolition you claim? How is such a wrongful claim substantiated roundhead? I would love to hear your expectations for what features a "non-CD" collapse should demonstrate.

Your second claim is an argument from ignorance based on the premise of your false dilemma.

The kink in the Penthouse is a telltale sign of symetrical widespread interior column failure.An attribute of a sucessful demo, and easy to note on demo videos for a comparison.

Witnesses state the building was cordoned off and the collapse expected as early as 3:00 in the afternoon. This is always done prior to a demo, its collapse is expected and the area is cleared.

Argument from ignorance.

• Do you have relevant models to support your assertion? would be interested in a detailed analysis of the collapse. Your assertion implies you must have extensively studied the structure of world trade center #7. I'll be sure to come to you next time I need help.
  
• Are you implying that standard procedure is composed differently in a situation where building stability is at stake as well as the lives of rescues workers? If so, please cite any relevant procedures that back up the information you imply on having. Other wise retract that statement as it relies on an deductive fallacy.

Reports by witnesses state the bottom floor was blown out prior to the onset of destruction.This characteristic is common on demo's.

This once again contradicts any assertion that the structure was taken out simultaneously. How do you intend to clarify this with other truth movement claims? The alternation between simultaneous failure and gradually takijng out structure one at a time is quite confusing.

Deputy Chief Hayden:"It came down about 5 o�clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o�clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse".

Is quote mining the only form of argumentation you have to offer? I think I know the answer to that already. Here is an excerpt with full context that can be found here: LINK

Hayden: Across the street. That’s what I was concerned about, that the fire would jump the streets. We had exposure problems, so Bobby’s function was just to contain the fire there. They had a big air shaft in there and he was able to get a line across the shaft and keep it in one wing of the building on the upper floors. And eventually it burned itself out. There was a good fire condition. It was pouring smoke and fire out of there. We were going to a fourth-alarm fire there. If you had to really address this fire, you would be trying to handle it as a fourth alarmer and he had nowhere near that, so he did a good job with that. We also were doing searches along all the debris in front of the Marriott and out on West Street, the void searches.

Firehouse: Other people tell me that there were a lot of firefighters in the street who were visible, and they put out traffic cones to mark them off?
Hayden: Yeah. There was enough there and we were marking off. There were a lot of damaged apparatus there that were covered. We tried to get searches in those areas. By now, this is going on into the afternoon, and we were concerned about additional collapse, not only of the Marriott, because there was a good portion of the Marriott still standing, but also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.

Firehouse: Was there heavy fire in there right away?
Hayden: No, not right away, and that’s probably why it stood for so long because it took a while for that fire to develop. It was a heavy body of fire in there and then we didn’t make any attempt to fight it. That was just one of those wars we were just going to lose. We were concerned about the collapse of a 47-story building there. We were worried about additional collapse there of what was remaining standing of the towers and the Marriott, so we started pulling the people back after a couple of hours of surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris. We started to pull guys back because we were concerned for their safety.

This not only places your credibility in question it also answers why they cordoned off the immediate area. How many times must it be presented to you before you understand that quote-mining and distorting witness testimony fails? It is obvious you're a liar roundhead. Controlled demolition does not give off warning signs of structural failure taking place.

Pile debris was removed prior to researchers being able to study it.This IS done on a CD because the cause is already known, no reason to examine the pile.

Deductive fallacy - Like saying Portland is in Maine, therefore it is the capital of Maine. Failed... yet again. NIST has covered this in their WTC 7 FAQ.

Why didn't the investigators look at actual steel samples from WTC 7?
Steel samples were removed from the site before the NIST investigation began. In the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, debris was removed rapidly from the site to aid in recovery efforts and facilitate emergency responders’ efforts to work around the site. Once it was removed from the scene, the steel from WTC 7 could not be clearly identified. Unlike the pieces of steel from WTC 1 and WTC 2, which were painted red and contained distinguishing markings, WTC 7 steel did not contain such identifying characteristics.

Emergency worker: it was horrifying... about a second later the bottom floor caved out and the building followed after that... we saw the building crash down all the way to the ground... we were in shock." - 1010 WINS NYC News Radio

This testimony was given by Daryl, and once again, you have taken the use of similes to a whole new level of BS:

Oh man it could be this guy, but dang he gives his name--
Reporter: “I'm here with an emergency worker. He's a first year NYU medical student. He was down there; he was trying to help people. His name is Darryl.”

Darryl: "Yeah I was just standing there, ya know... we were watching the building [WTC 7] actually 'cuz it was on fire... the bottom floors of the building were on fire and... we heard this sound that sounded like a clap of thunder [Grizzly add: a metaphor]... turned around - we were shocked to see that the building was, ah well it looked like there was a shockwave ripping through the building and the windows all busted out... it was horrifying... about a second later the bottom floor caved out and the building followed after that... we saw the building crash down all the way to the ground... we were in shock." - 1010 WINS NYC News Radio (09/11/01)

7 exhibited all of the features of a CD, nothing doesn't fit, it displays all the signature characteristics.

You mean like:

• Setting fire to it 8 hours in advance of the Coup de grâce? Risking the premature detonation of charges that were somehow mysteriously installed by black ops in an occupied facility?
  
• You mean bulging of the exterior structure generating fears of structural instability?
  
• You mean the domino effect of a progressive failure of structural elements?
  
• You mean the collapse of the penthouse 8 seconds prior to the visible exterior collapse?
  
• You mean the warning signs of structural instability well in advance of what you apparently consider a controlled demolition. So now sudden collapse give warnings? Non sequitor much?
  
• You mean the absence of loud explosives going off in sequence just before collapse?

oh... so much more. Maybe if you rinse and repeat a few thousand more times you'll convince someone.

Asymetrical damage doesnt agree with complete and symetrical near freefall failure.

I thought structural damage from direct debris impact played a second hand role in the collapse? Are you implying that the fires which progressed from the south face to the north face had zero effect on the interior structure?

Where are multiple, huge concrete floor pieces in the rubble. Much as an eathquake can bring a building down, with a CD, and leave large pancaked floor sections visible in the rubble, 7...

WTC 7 was not a primarily concrete structure. Yet another amazing demonstration of blissful ignorance on your part. Unfortunatly for you WTC 7 did not collapse from an earthquake, you are once again assuming two completely different construction materials and methods should result in the same end result. Once again, rationalists do not buy apples to fish comparisons... try again.

and fire doesnt pulverize concrete. This is an extremely important point. Fire damage and earthquake damage should result in similar looking debris piles with intact or semi intact piles of floors visible.

This is a non-sequitor. Aren't we talking about a steel building, where the amount of concrete use in floor slabs is reduced to a minimum? Short of the overall effect of the collapse on the floor slabs with the differences in slab thickness the comparison or fire damage to earthquake damage is a terrible analogy

Fire has never before brought down completely a steel framed building.

Unfortunately there is a first time for everything roundhead. Normally safety measures are taken to reduce such a risk but factors such as:

• Construction system
• Building Height
• Length of beam spans

All affect how the building is to react to unusual conditions, for example the loss of primary and backup fire suppressant measures (Fire fighting, and built in sproinklers) due to a nearby collapse of two towers. Or Secondary effects of debris impact. Unlike you roundhead, I consider these difference before I make a claim, you on the other hand claim:

many have been on fire, longer, and more widespread.

Which while true fails to consider not only the circumstantial differences; for example all of the fires were fought, none suffered from second effects from impact damage, be it plane or debris from another collapse. You do not do any background research on the material some buildings were constructed of, or the construction system used in the steel buildings you do use. You are incapable like the rest of the truth movement, of at least trying to consider such differences that are essential to any serious debater discussing this subject.

If its fire alone, its illogical to predict demise, there is no precedent.

Why then... is structural steel by code enforcement required in all steel buildings? Why then, has it been known for decades that steel loses material strength in fire? Why then does construction implement expansion joints in every form of construction if the effect of thermal expansion are not a concern in the construction industry?

What then does the roof failure in the Kader toy factory, or the perimeter column failure in the Windsor tower tell you? No precedent of structural steel failing in fire? You are a sneaky little liar...

There is overwhelming [NO] evidence to state that CD is the cause regarding 7. Its fits the video evidence perfectly, it fits the resultant debris pile perfectly, it would explain why its demise was predicted ahead of time perfectly, and would also explain why its rubble was not studied, if CD was [NOT] trying to be hid as the culprit.

Fixed that for you

 

[roundhead]

And yet no demolition company has come forward to support Truther allegations. Do you think it's because they are all cowards the way you believe the FDNY to be cowards?

I cede that only one demolition company would have been used to do wtc 7. I think its resonable to assume that if they did it, they would be very unlikely to come out and admit it.

 

[WildCat]

I cede that only one demolition company would have been used to do wtc 7. I think its resonable to assume that if they did it, they would be very unlikely to come out and admit it.

And they used silent explosives?

 

[beachnut]

I cede that only one demolition company would have been used to do wtc 7. I think its resonable to assume that if they did it, they would be very unlikely to come out and admit it.

WTC7 was destroyed by fire, makes your ideas pure fantasy based on zero evidence.

 

[TheWeirdSkeptic]

Didn't a truther admit there was no evidence of a CD? Wasn't this roundhead or was it someone else?

 

[TJM]

And they used silent explosives?

Wired with invisible detcord, and they used Star Trek type transporter technology to place the silent explosives on the columns without disturbing the drywall and moving objects out of the way so people wouldn't notice?

 

[Pardalis]

*sigh* If at first they don't succeed repeat until true. That's their motto -_-

That's their technique. Like Mackey said, it's argument Ad Nauseam.

Twoofer makes a bogus claim.
We debunk it.
Twoofer repeats bogus claim.
We debunk it again.
Twoofer repeats bogus claim.
We debunk it still.
Two years later another twoofer repeats bogus claim.
New debunkers debunk it.
Twoofer repeats bogus claim.
People get tired and move on.
Twoofers think they've won.

 

[pomeroo]

I agree 100% with you. Rapid collapse is normal, IN A CD. They nearly all have this feature.

Fire induced failure of a steel framed skyscraper, has no known "failure mode" its without precedent.

Rapid, near freefall collapse is perfectly in sync with a CD. Its entirely without precedent in a fire induced collapse, so uncomparable and unreferenceable.

The debris pile, as i pointed out earlier, also contains characteristics of CD, massive pulverization, and no large chanks of stacked floors/concrete, that are evident in other "gravity" driven collapses.

In addition, as i earlier pointed out, "pile research" which was basically not scientifically carried out regarding 7's rubble pile, is normal for a CD. Demo companies have no need to research the pile, the reason for it being there is a designed, preordained event, that's causation needs no study.

A cd company would do exactly what we saw regarding 7, know its fine to remove the pile without study, because the piles existance is already factually accounted for.

It's fascinating that no demolition professionals take your fantasies seriously. What do you know that they don't?

 

[pomeroo]

The building collapsed at virtually free fall speed. Several studies have been done(Including by Legge)which show from observing a certain point of the building as reference, and timing and calculating its speed, it was "virtually" free fall speed. It fell though basically air, through the path of MOST resistance, the structure itself.

Billowing clouds of dust are a characteristic of CD.


Controlling the rubble pile by pulling in the exterior columns to fall inward, are evidence of a sucessful CD

The kink in the Penthouse is a telltale sign of symetrical widespread interior column failure.An attribute of a sucessful demo, and easy to note on demo videos for a comparison.

Reports by witnesses state the bottom floor was blown out prior to the onset of destruction.This characteristic is common on demo's.

Witnesses state the building was cordoned off and the collapse expected as early as 3:00 in the afternoon. This is always done prior to a demo, its collapse is expected and the area is cleared.


Pile debris was removed prior to researchers being able to study it.This IS done on a CD because the cause is already known, no reason to examine the pile.



Deputy Chief Hayden:"It came down about 5 o�clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o�clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse".


Emergency worker:it was horrifying... about a second later the bottom floor caved out and the building followed after that... we saw the building crash down all the way to the ground... we were in shock." - 1010 WINS NYC News Radio


Rescuer 3: "The building is about to blow up. Move it back!"

"We are walking back. There's a building about to blow up. There's flame and debris coming down."






The buildings collapse, if it was a CD, in the aftermath did exactly what a designed CD should do. In other words, building 7, in aftermath, looks exactly like what a Cd should look like, if sucessfull. Symetrical, no or virtually no collateral damage, neat tidy debris pile.

7 exhibited all of the features of a CD, nothing doesnt fit, it displays all the signature characteristics.


In short


7 looks exactly like a cd

It demise was predicted ahead of time

Its rubble was removed before researchers could study it(and removed by cd company)


It, if not a CD(cd's are of course a common occurance)would have to be explained away as something that isnt a common occurance, but would still feature all the same characteristics)

This hasnt been done.

Asymetrical damage doesnt agree with complete and symetrical near freefall failure.

No metal from the supposed failure area has been studied to support this "anti theory" of fire being the only cause.NO PHYSICAL EVIDENCE SUPPORTS FIRE AS A CAUSE, of the building being pulverized and destroyed

Where are multiple, huge concrete floor pieces in the rubble. Much as an eathquake can bring a building down, and photographic evidence shows it leaves large pancaked floor sections visible in the rubble, 7, if falling down only because of fire, should mimic this attribute, as both are in fact gravity collapses, and fire doesnt pulverize concrete. This is an extremely important point. Fire damage and earthquake damage should result in similar loking debris piles with intact or semi intact piles of floors visible.


Fire has never before brought down completely a steel framed building, and many have been on fire, longer, and more widespread.

The collapse was predicted, in spite of the fact the ultimate explanation for the buildings demise was a first time in history failure, that nobody in the city could have possibly have thought of in a historical perspective.

If it was a CD, its perfectly logical to predict demise ahead of time, and get people back and rope it off, in fact its normal.

If its fire alone, its illogical to predict demise, there is no precedent.


There is overwhelming evidence to state that CD is the cause regarding 7. Its fits the video evidence perfectly, it fits the resultant debris pile perfectly, it would explain why its demise was predicted ahead of time perfectly, and would also explain why its rubble was not studied, if CD was trying to be hid as the culprit.

Mark put in so much work and you silly liars can't even trouble yourselves to glance at it:

http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/introduction

 

[Grizzly Bear]

So NIST invented Thermal Expansion now....

LOL

Unfortunately this bit of insanity is spreading amongst the TM:

According to a federal agency report released Thursday, a "new phenomenon" known as thermal expansion was directly responsible for the mysterious collapse of World Trade Center 7 on Sept. 11, 2001.

Source

This is one of several sites I've already seen to pop up that weird interpretation of NIST's analysis... Unfortunately thermal expansion is still a relevant concern considering that expansion joints are used in construction to minimize the effects of it once tyhe construction is finished. R. Mackey rightly brought up the issue earlier today...