Windows Breaking From Heat

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Don't think it was a nuke, Jones tested for radiation. But we all observe the mushroom cloud. Observations require explanations.

The fact that you needed Jones to tell you it wasn't a nuke is a damning indictment of our public education system.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Arkan suggests a new thread. I agree. I see no evidence for fires hot enough to break windows.

here is a requested pic of 1st interstate bank, a far hotter fire that consumed far more of the building
[qimg]http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/analysis/compare/lafire_firstinterstate_files/1stInterstate_NYBoardofUnderwriters.jpg[/qimg]

You have provided no evidence to show that the fire in WTC 1, 2, or 7 had to have broken windows. You have not shown the fire rating information on the windows, the proximity of the fire to the windows, or any pictures showing the NIST table to be wrong.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

And while we're looking at your picture above, can someone please give me an answer to this:

Where does the energy come from to move those tons of debris sideways 300+ feet,

Gravity.

when that material must have come from the top of the tower which was only falling at about 20-30 mph?

Please show your calculations for this assertion. When the debris this the ground it was going over 175 mph.

It first got pulverized, then it bounced off something with enough force to move it 300 feet sideways, is that right?

No.

 

[WildCat]

OK, so Loss Leader thinks that the aircraft impact somehow provided energy to propel the material 300 ft sideways an hour and a half later?? If any of the rest of you have intellectual honesty, you will correct him.

No, I will correct you. There was plenty of energy available for falling material to strike other material and get deflected 300 ft. sideways.

If there was an explosion capable of ejecting material 300 ft. sideways, we would also expect to see material getting blown upwards. We don't see that, do we TS1234?

 

[apathoid]

Apathoid was apparently serious when he asked

Because we observe it, Apathoid. Observations require explanations. Science.

No, YOU observe a mushroom cloud. The rest us see a building collapsing and debris getting ejected - AS ONE WOULD EXPECT - on the way down.

And.... just....stop with your appeals for science Mr. Iwantpicturesandvideoonlynographsorchartsplease, noone here buys it. You wouldn't know science if it snuck up behind you and tapped you on the shoulder.

 

[apathoid]

No, I will correct you. There was plenty of energy available for falling material to strike other material and get deflected 300 ft. sideways.

If there was an explosion capable of ejecting material 300 ft. sideways, we would also expect to see material getting blown upwards. We don't see that, do we TS1234?

You'd also hear an explosive device with the power to do that. Why are all these explosives so silent

 

[DavidJames]

This guy is starting to remind me of Christophera, only less able to remain focused.

 

[Peephole]

Don't think it was a nuke, Jones tested for radiation. But we all observe the mushroom cloud. Observations require explanations.

What if we trilateral commissioners delivered Jones the wrong sample?
Ever think about that?

Or what if Jones himself is one of our agents?

Face it, you're no less new world order sheeple than the people you're fighting.

*insert demonic laughter*

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

acceleration from gravity is about 32 feet per second per second. So after one second of falling, material is going 32 feet/second. That's about 21.8 miles per hour.

That material hitting the top of WTC7 did not hit the ground. It must have come from the top of WTC1. Allowing one second of fall time is very generous. Tremendous dust was produced in a fraction of a second.

So we have material that is only falling 20-30 miles/hour, as i said. This low velocity is supposed to first pulverize the material we see, then it must bounce off something for the downward motion to be directed laterally.

 

[Loss Leader]

OK, so Loss Leader thinks that the aircraft impact somehow provided energy to propel the material 300 ft sideways an hour and a half later?? If any of the rest of you have intellectual honesty, you will correct him.

Shmendrick, let's try an exercise in itellectual honesty.

Will you agree that the towers of the World Trade Center were very unique buildings? They were two of the tallest buildings in the world. They were also built with a very unusual central core design instead of the common skeletal steel structure.

Will you also agree that some evidence points to the fact that some of the construction including the fireproofing was not done as well as possible? In part, this is because some of it was controlled by the mob.

In fact, the manner in which the buildings were fireproofed (with spray foam) is not considered acceptable in today's construction.

And you also must agree that the Boeing 767 is an aircraft that did not exist at the time the towers were built.

On that topic, certainly you must concede that prior to 9/11, nobody had ever crashed an in-flight Boeing 767 into an office building. In fact, there's really very little precedent for any Boeing 700-series aircraft being flown into any types of buildings.

All of that being true, would you demonstrate the intellectual honesty to admit that nobody on the planet earth could predict how the towers would react to being hit with 767s? I mean, you must agree that there is no precedent. There is no way to be able to model beforehand what might happen in that event. Nobody ever did and nobody could.

All this being true, why does the behavior of the buildings offer any surprises? Why do they create any "observations" to "explain"? Why, after the fact, are we suddenly smart enough to say "The buildings wouldn't have reacted that way," if we couldn't do so before the fact?

Isn't is much more logical to look at this one-time, unprecedented event and state, "I never thought that would happen"?

Ah, he woun't read this. And even if he does, he sure as heck won't answer.

 

[uruk]

I just started reading this thread. I haven't read the original post.
Would not the floor collapsing one by down upon each other compress the air below it and then force itself out the windows. thus producing the "squib" effect. the billowing debrie which would be mostly dust, which is very light would also be ejected away from the building because of the air pressure The heavier debrie would be deflecting off the floor below and would be falling at terminal velocity.

Just my 2 cents

 

[Arus808]

I just started reading this thread. I haven't read the original post.
Would not the floor collapsing one by down upon each other compress the air below it and then force itself out the windows. thus producing the "squib" effect. the billowing debrie which would be mostly dust, which is very light would also be ejected away from the building because of the air pressure The heavier debrie would be deflecting off the floor below and would be falling at terminal velocity.

Just my 2 cents

yes.
but in the cter's mind, nothing "should" be ejected.
and those "ejections" are explosives going off.

 

[Kent1]

You stand corrected, have you learned your lesson? Time will tell.

[qimg]http://i6.tinypic.com/449fjf8.jpg[/qimg]

Repsoted from one of your other many threads, courtesy of Mancman(who you completely ignored because MRC Hans' reply was just below his).

Great link!

 

[Mancman]

And while we're looking at your picture above, can someone please give me an answer to this:

Where does the energy come from to move those tons of debris sideways 300+ feet, when that material must have come from the top of the tower which was only falling at about 20-30 mph? It first got pulverized, then it bounced off something with enough force to move it 300 feet sideways, is that right?

Perimeter columns peeled away in large sections. The buildings were 1360ft tall. Nothing remarkable about debris landing 400ft away.

At the risk of sounding like a certain ex-ST911 member, some of the perimeter columns toppled over like trees.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Allowing one second of fall time is very generous.

i calculate 7 seconds to fall from the top of WTC1 to the top of WTC7

for the math impaired that gives a speed of close to 150mph for falling debris vertical component, horizontal velocity would add even more kinetic energy, as would debris not impacting the top of WTC (because it woudl be falling longer)

 

[Mancman]

I'm not interested in tables. It's too easy to just make up stuff and type it in. The whole point is we don't believe the government reports. I'm looking for actual evidence, that is videos of windows falling and flames licking out. Next best would be a set of two pictures of the same window taken at two different points in time.

Evidence please.

Of course, anything that disagrees with a conspiracy is made up?

Here is your photographic evidence. It took a couple of minutes to find these in the NIST reports. Again, I suggest you read them.

 

[Bell]

Of course, anything that disagrees with a conspiracy is made up?

Here is your photographic evidence. It took a couple of minutes to find these in the NIST reports. Again, I suggest you read them.

Troof1234 is waiting for the comic book version to be published. Comic books have lots of pictures.

 

[apathoid]

Of course, anything that disagrees with a conspiracy is made up?

Here is your photographic evidence. It took a couple of minutes to find these in the NIST reports. Again, I suggest you read them.

You must be joking. Those are clearly photoshopped, and since they come from NIST we cant trust them at all(just like we cant trust their charts), troooofseeker requires science man.....science.

 

[DavidJames]

You must be joking. Those are clearly photoshopped, and since they come from NIST we cant trust them at all(just like we cant trust their charts), troooofseeker requires science man.....science.

yeah, science, like expecting a table with 4 legs to behave like the wtc1/2, yeah, real science.

 

[rwguinn]

I just started reading this thread. I haven't read the original post.
Would not the floor collapsing one by down upon each other compress the air below it and then force itself out the windows. thus producing the "squib" effect. the billowing debrie which would be mostly dust, which is very light would also be ejected away from the building because of the air pressure The heavier debrie would be deflecting off the floor below and would be falling at terminal velocity.

Just my 2 cents

in one read, you have grasped what SFB1234 has not figured out in just under 200 himself, and several THOUSAND by others...
Well Done. Welcome!