• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

World record for a high-rise steel structure for CD is...

bob_kark said:
What the hell are you talking about!? What studies have you read about "top-down demolitions" that allowed you to make this determination? How many "top-down demolitions" have you witnessed or studied?

Can you even find another instance of a "top-down demolition" ever occuring in the history of mankind? No! That's because it completely defeats the purpose of a controlled demolition to... LOSE CONTROL OF THE DAMN DEMOLITION! Who in their right mind would ever do such a thing?! Really, who in their right mind would ever even concieve that something like that would be an accepted practice in the CD industry?!
Click to expand...
To be fair, he did say "top-down demolition," not "top-down CD." In theory, he's right, but since no demolition occurred, in reality he's wrong.
 
einsteen
Chance that it will implode and start from the bottom is zero because that hasn’t happened, chance that it will implode from top to down is 100% (2 out of 2).
Click to expand...

Great! Now I can add statistics to the list of subjects that you have demonstrated that you know nothing about!
Click to expand...

So if I create a new type of game die with 37 sides and roll it twice getting 21 and then 16, there is a zero chance of me getting a 10? And a fifty percent chance of getting a 21?
 
Gravy said:
To be fair, he did say "top-down demolition," not "top-down CD." In theory, he's right, but since no demolition occurred, in reality he's wrong.
Click to expand...
Either way, he's discussing it as if some standard has been set. However, I only know of two buildings that have collapsed in that manner. While I agree it was a demolition, it was far from intentional. That's why I'd love to know what other "top-down demolitions' he's aware of that would allow him to make this judgement. But I see he already responded to MarkyX earlier, so I'll drop it.
 
Last edited:
Abbyas said:
So if I create a new type of game die with 37 sides and roll it twice getting 21 and then 16, there is a zero chance of me getting a 10? And a fifty percent chance of getting a 21?
Click to expand...

Your grasp of statistics is impressive indeed, Abby.

Sorry... that's CT statistics... also known as statistiCTs.
 
einsteen said:
Gravy, there is no way to get a top-down demolition without a relative amount of debris flying away.
Click to expand...


That's why a controlled demolition would never use a top-down demolition.

Just another reason why the falling of the WTC towers 1 and 2 were not controlled demolitions in any way.
 
einsteen said:
Marky, that does not exist because that is not the conventional 'clean' way, from bottom-up there are hundreds, wtc7 is the best example. And that should be the new world record.
No the twin towers were no controlled demolitions, I'm convinced.
Click to expand...

Believing that the gubment decided to intentionally collapse WTC7 hours after both towers were hit and collapsed, the Pentagon was hit and collapsed, and flight 93 smashed into a Pennsylvania field (when any one of those events could've justified war) makes about as much sense as changing one's font style in every post.

Actually it makes exorbitantly less sense, but I just wanted to work that font dig in there...
 
MarkyX said:
There is no such thing as a top-down demolition.

I never seen it and every demo expert interviewed all stated the same scenario: The collapse started at the point of the plane crash, not at the bottom, therefore it's not a CD.

Show me one video of a top down demolition involving an office building. It could be concrete or steel frame, or whatever...
Click to expand...

Ask and ye shall recieve...
 
TK0001 said:
Believing that the gubment decided to intentionally collapse WTC7 hours after both towers were hit and collapsed, the Pentagon was hit and collapsed, and flight 93 smashed into a Pennsylvania field (when any one of those events could've justified war) makes about as much sense as changing one's font style in every post.

Actually it makes exorbitantly less sense, but I just wanted to work that font dig in there...
Click to expand...
At least Jowenko speculated on what the motive might be to bring down building 7: sooper sekrit gubmint info stored there. It's idiotic, but it's more of an effort than most CTs make, I suppose because they know they'll be in deep trouble if they're challenged to come up with a reason that makes sense. Einsteen?
 
@bob_kark
You already deleted your message, I don't have to answer it.

@Abbyas
If you have a dice with 37 sides and hit 21 and then 16, the chance you will throw that is (1/37)^2=1/1369, the chance you will hit 21 and 16 is higher (i.e. 2/1369) because you can throw 21 & 16 or 16 & 21, the chance of getting a 1 or 2 or... or 37 is 1/37

@pgwenthold
Exactly, no CDs

@TK0001
Fonts ? I have an English-American version of word at work, used that today

@Gravy
Jowenko's conclusion was based on the technical info he got, it was told later that it had sensitive information, probably after the interview when a JREF'r contacted him. Then detectives should say something, that's a different kind of sport indeed, but very relevant. What is so idiotic about it btw? if the other buildings also have a chance to collapse because of damage the chance that wtc1, wtc2 and wtc7 collapse and wtc3,wtc4,wtc5,wtc6,wtc8 etc don't ? That is even more near zero. Ever heard about Drake's formula ? That's something different but the idea is the same.
 
Last edited:
Also interesting, from the report :

"Columns weighing over 500 lb/ft, having up to 7.25 inch thick laminated steel flanges and 6 inch thick webs, defied commercially available shaped charge technology. CDI analyzed each column, determined the actual load it carried and then used cutting torches to scarf-off steel plates in order to use smaller shaped charges to cut the remaining steel."

(my bolding)

But wot? No thermite?!?! Almost unheard of.

Edit: similar technique used on Everglades Hotel in downtown Miami, Florida, 2005 :

"it was decided that CDI could effectively minimize the amount of linear shaped charge explosives to be used in the structure. By torch-cutting splice plates on selected upper columns/floors, and utilizing approximately 3,000 feet of steel-core cable on alternate upper floors to help “pull” the northern and eastern walls away from the fiber optics cables in NE Third Avenue and Biscayne Boulevard"

n.b. the "pull" which was actual physical pulling with cables.
 
Last edited:
GlennB said:
n.b. the "pull" which was actual physical pulling with cables.
Click to expand...
As it was with WTC 6, which the CTs use as an example of "pull" meaning CD. No, it was pulled down with cables attached to excavators.
 
Jowenko also explains that you don't need to apply charges on all levels, with a cutting torch you can burn them V-shaped and they are loose on top of each other. Never knew those CD techniques, I always thought you place charges on all carrying points and in fact start to blast below, if a floor then sags in and the next floor is at bottom level you repeat the procedure, your cables should not break then because then you can't reach the next level. In fact that is then a demolition wave from bottom to top with a speed that behaves like free-fall but then in opposite direction.

ps. mr Jowenko thinks that you can do it in 7 hours in that chaotic day, he also mentions the Silverstein "pull it", if this Silverstein movie is out of context I would be interested in the complete movie.
 
Last edited:
BTW: What happend to this english skyscraper wich should be destroyed in a controll demolition to test the theories.

I don´t remeber the Name of the Buildings and the Professor, who wanted to test it...
 
einsteen said:
Jowenko also explains that you don't need to apply charges on all levels, with a cutting torch you can burn them V-shaped and they are loose on top of each other. Never knew those CD techniques, I always thought you place charges on all carrying points and in fact start to blast below, if a floor then sags in and the next floor is at bottom level you repeat the procedure, your cables should not break then because then you can't reach the next level. In fact that is then a demolition wave from bottom to top with a speed that behaves like free-fall but then in opposite direction.

ps. mr Jowenko thinks that you can do it in 7 hours in that chaotic day, he also mentions the Silverstein "pull it", if this Silverstein movie is out of context I would be interested in the complete movie.
Click to expand...

Lemme get this straight - he actually thinks it would be possible to cut the supports of a 47 story building and rig it up with explosives.....in 7 hours? While half of it was severely damaged and on fire?

Is this what you're saying?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom