WTC-7 Was Taken Down Using Controlled Demolition

Field of incoherent and malicious blathering on web sites. That field.
 
Terral said:
.....
Anyone experienced in this field knows that massive column (over his head) was NOT cut using any cutting torch. You guys can believe anything you wish.
....
Click to expand...

"over his head" - or otherwise - would depend on the position of the camera in relation to the column and the guy. It could well be below his head in reality. We don't know, but Terral once more displays his ignorance of angles, perspective and the rest, vis-a-vis photography.

His infamous "sundial" calculations (on the old LCF forum), related to Pentagon photos from 9/11, would allow for the possibility of the sun being directly overhead (up 90°) in a non-tropical part of the world.

The man is a buffoon of the very highest order.
 
twinstead said:
A point taken.

But, all these undecided experts, yet Terral (and you?) are absolutely convinced it was CD. I wonder how many of these undecided experts are convinced, or even leaning toward, CD as well?

Regardless, what is your opinion of my characterization of Terral's debate tactics?
Click to expand...

Would that not require me to comment on a member rather than a member's posts?

I've promised the moderators to make every effort to behave according to the rules.

Yesterday with the Super Bowl on, I was less than sober and people seem to have had a field day reporting me for the slightest bit of intemperance.

I'm happy the Giants won though!

MM
 
Terral said:
Greetings to All:

All of the evidence points directly to insider terrorists taking down WTC-7 by Controlled Demolition on 9/11. WTC-7 was designed and built using Compartmentalization of all supporting columns and beams separated by solid concrete slabs horizontally and curtain walls vertically. A building fire has never destroyed a steel-framed skyscraper in US history before or after 9/11 and WTC-1, WTC-2 and WTC-7 were owned by Larry “Pull It” Silverstein. Many fail to realize the World Trade Center Towers had never been in private hands prior to the summer of 2001, when Mr. Silverstein received possession from the New York Port Authority.

Cooperative Research Website:




Watch the WTC-7 Collapse Video again:

Use your curser to hold the round scrollbar and move WTC-7 up and down repeatedly. The roof section and the center of the building collapse first, then the two sides plummet at ‘free fall’ velocity like any successful controlled demolition. Before looking at the details of how WTC-7 was built using Compartmentalization of all the steel supports, we need to take a look at the massive building itself.

[qimg]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/Terral03/WTC7Steel.jpg[/qimg]

All of the WTC-7 steel columns, beams, girders and bar joists were bolted down and welded together into a single unit creating literally thousands of connections that must be severed to cause the catastrophic failure seen from the aftermath of the attack.

[qimg]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/Terral03/wtc7-debris.jpg[/qimg]

The melting point of WTC-7 structural steel is 1535 degrees Celsius or 2795 degrees Fahrenheit. The first problem with the ‘Fire Caused The Collapse’ Theory is that building fires burn between 800 and 1000 degrees Fahrenheit , or about one third the required temperature to melt structural steel. The second problem is that building fires typically burn for only 20 minutes in any given area, because the fuel is depleted and the fire moves in the direction of a fresh fuel source. The third problem is that steel is an excellent conductor of heat and any steel-framed network would disperse the heat much more quickly than any building fire could raise the temperature to anywhere near ‘steel-softening’ temperatures. Another problem is that all supporting columns were coated with 3-hour ‘spray-on’ fireproofing insulation, which is nine times more protection needed for the typical building fire; even if the required 2800 degree temperatures were reached.

911Research Website:

The website above is perhaps the best on the internet for discovering the truth about the WTC-7 collapse. Moving down the page, Figure 5-3 shows the massive steel network and how certain areas (floors 1-7, 22-24) received extra support.

[qimg]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/Terral03/fig-5-3.jpg[/qimg]

This information is very important, because remember WTC-7 collapsed in one single smooth motion, which means extra attention was paid to placing charges to sever these thicker and stronger steel supports. Try to imagine the amount of energy required to break all of these connections simultaneously and you begin to see the ‘building fire theory’ is certainly a hoax. Below you come to Figure 5.3.3 and descriptions of how WTC-7 was built in many separate ‘compartments’ eliminating ‘fire’ as even a remote possibility for causing this collapse.

[qimg]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/Terral03/WTC7Insulation.jpg[/qimg]

Even if two or five or ten fires were started, the fuel source within those particular compartments would be consumed LONG before the fireproofing safety countermeasures were compromised; and the fire had no way to pass through solid concrete slabs or curtain walls to invade the neighboring compartments. This does not even account for the fully functional sprinkler system that had to be turned off for these fires to spread any distance at all. Here is a four minute video to help gain a better perspective on how to weigh the evidence in this case:

Four Minute WTC-7 Collapse Video

“Fire has never destroyed a steel building,” but three steel buildings owned by Larry Silverstein were ‘Pulled’ on 9/11. “Pull it” is controlled demolition lingo for wiring the building up and pulling it down. Mr. Silverstein was obviously lying about speaking to the New York Fire Chief, as the firemen only entered the scene on 9/11 after the Twin Towers attacks. This Fire Chief had no access to Controlled Demolition charges when he arrived at WTC-7 for “Pulling” down the 47-story steel-framed skyscraper that could possibly be placed in a single day. Here we have a few small fires burning on a few floors, but the Fire Chief cannot figure any way to extinguish them. Since the firemen had no time to set all the required charges to “Pull” WTC-7 down in just a few hours, as if firemen even have controlled demolition crews, then Mr. Silverstein just pointed the finger at himself about having prior knowledge of these 9/11 attacks. Now compare our images of WTC-7 and these “Pull It” videos:

Paris Building

Office Building

Landmark Tower Implosion

Many buildings have been demolished using controlled demolition looking exactly like WTC-7 on 9/11, but again, no steel-framed skyscraper has ever collapsed due to fire in the history of this planet. Twenty-first century demolition techniques include the use of Thermite Shaped Charges found all over WTC-1, WTC-2 and WTC-7.

Shaped Charges And The World Trade Center Collapses

[qimg]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/Terral03/thermite.jpg[/qimg]

The damage from a thermite shaped charge is exactly what you see above the fireman’s confused head. Note the size of the massive column and the molten iron residue that flowed inside and outside the column.

[qimg]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/Terral03/cut3.jpg[/qimg]

Thermite burns at a very high 2500 degrees Centigrade or 4532 degrees Fahrenheit, which represents the kind of temperature required to sever these massive red-iron columns. As a trained demolition supervisor tearing down buildings for many years, I know of nobody using 45-degree angle cuts to remove any red-iron part of any conventional demolition job. This particular column has molten iron residue, which is a ‘Controlled Demolition’ Signature, as any torch cut would blow the molten iron off the column entirely away from the worker. There is no cut from any torch that would leave molten iron residue on the inside and outside of 'all' the sides of a column this way. The idea that any demolition worker would make a 45-degree cut is ridiculous, because of the danger to other workers and the waste of fuel.

Another problem with the Official ‘Fire’ Cover Story is these 45-degree angle shaped-charge cuts appear everywhere . . .

[qimg]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/Terral03/b7_3.jpg[/qimg]

. . . even in locations where demolition crew workers could not possibly reach. The common practice is to remove steel debris in an orderly ‘pick and remove’ manner, which eliminates the possibility of needlessly shifting weight and putting workers in danger. We play this dangerous game like a child plays ‘Pickup Sticks,’ as any skilled demolition foreman can look at the pile and tell you which debris to remove first. None of the demolition workers in the picture above climbed up any ladder forty or fifty feet in the air to make that 45-degree angel cut, because that was part of the original ‘Controlled Demolition’ of WTC-7. Note the clean 90-degree cuts labeled “Severed Column End” scattered throughout the debris pile. However, also note these steel members are buried under the debris of the walls collapsing upon them ‘during’ the controlled demolition process. These cuts could not have been made by this demolition crew, because they still have mountains of debris to remove before even thinking about cutting any structural steel; which would only serve to shift weight in this very dangerous situation. The very best work on these WTC controlled demolition attacks is presented by Dr. Steven E. Jones (Brigham Young University) here:

Liberty Post Website:

WTC-7 was definitely (100 percent certainty) brought down using Controlled Demolition techniques also found in WTC-1 and WTC-2. This evidence explains why we have reports on hundreds of ‘explosions’ taking place throughout the day.

Bamm, Bamm, Bamm; then Three Big Explosions . . .

And yet, the ‘keyword sanitized’ 911Commission Report only uses the term ‘explosion’ six times outside the notation references for ‘all’ these 9/11 cases and never uses the term ‘explosions’ (plural) even once. Guess what? The bogus Arlington County After-Action Report uses the term ‘explosion’ six times in 215 pages ‘and’ also never uses the term ‘explosions’ even one time the very same way, even though we can hear multiple explosions taking place in this single News Video.

9/11 was definitely and inside-job and many LIARS are helping the real terrorists get away with murdering thousands of our innocent fellow Americans . . .

GL,

Terral
Click to expand...

What you are calling thermite residue most of us call slag.
It happens when you cut steel with a oxy-acetylene torch.
 
DGM said:
So MM do you support Terral's assessments as representative of your "truth" movement?
Click to expand...

I've never liked how some members here take the approach that 'one label fits all' when referring to members and outsiders who associate with 9/11 Truth Movement.

I respect Terral's right to state his views and wish him luck in doing so successfully.

Regarding his assessments, I can't say as I'm up to date on his views.

MM
 
Now Those Are Some NicePants :0)

Hi NicePants:

Anyone experienced in this field knows that massive column (over his head) was NOT cut using any cutting torch.

Nice >> No True Scotsman?Which field are you referring to?
Click to expand...


Please forgive, but if you are not paying much attention, then nothing I say will make one lick of sense. Go back and read the post from where you took the quote to find this Christopher Bollyn article with the famous picture of the confused fireman. Then go down and reread his commentary, because I know you read every word the first time. :0)

Christopher Bollyn >> There is substantial evidence that thermite was used to cut the central support columns, which caused the towers to fall.

Evidence can be seen on photographs of the columns from the rubble of the World Trade Center.

In this photo, for example, the column directly above the fireman's helmet shows that it was cut with thermite. There is a substantial amount of hardened molten iron which can be seen on both the inside and outside of the box column. This is precisely what one would expect to find on a column which had been cut with thermite.

Experts who have viewed this photograph say that this column was not cut with a torch.
Click to expand...


To which Nicepants asks, “Which field are you referring to?” My statement agrees with Mr. Bollyn’s final assertion 100 percent that anyone experienced (the experts) in this (demolition) field knows damn good and well that no cutting torch on God’s green earth made that 45-degree angle cut. Why?

1. The debris in the area must be cleared, before the segmenting of larger steel members can even begin!

2. 45-degree angle cuts are dangerous and never used in typical demolition of massive steel members of this or any size. Fancy 45-degree cuts might look pretty, but they take much longer to make and waste precious fuel in the process.

3. Slag from a cutting torch solidifies instantly upon contacting the air and cannot possibly froth up and boil over into the inside ‘and’ outside of the column this way. That molten metal deposit was produced from a chemical reaction that exceed the minimum melting temperature (2800 degrees) of red-iron BY FAR, which finds 75 percent of the molten metal falling down the ‘outside’ of the column and 25 percent on the ‘inside.’ The reason is that the charges were placed on the ‘outside’ of this column and on this 45-degree angle to allow movement of the upper section back in our direction ‘during’ the Controlled Demolition process.

4. The fact that you have rows and rows of 45-degree angle cuts (like this) means the CD supervisor was moving entire column lines in one particular direction. You see a pattern of severed pedestals leaning in the direction of the ‘high point’ of the 45 degree angle in all the pictures, because the massive upper section ‘slid’ downward with all the building weight from above; and all the stub columns were pushed in the exact opposite direction.

5. If all of these 45-degree angle cuts were made by the steel workers in the months after 9/11, then they should exhibit a random pattern of cuts leaning in all four directions. However, careful examination of the evidence reveals a clear Demolition Signature for WTC-7. You can take that to the bank!

6. That is the reason all the WTC steel was removed from the scene, before any real investigation could even take place.

The reason you do not have tons of Demolition Experts speaking out against the Official Cover Story nonsense is because they want to stay in business. :0) If I was still a licensed Contractor in the field, then I would not be having this conversation with you right now. However, my children and their children are at risk of becoming the victims of the next 911-like attack (in Oakland, California), so here we are all dressed up in some NicePants with someplace to go. :0)

BTW, the CIT Chat-Monkeys are on the run over at the LC Board. I was sorry to see you got caught up in their nonsense. They have their hands full and do not now whether the mess themselves or go blind. :0)

GL,

Terral
 
Last edited:
Terral said:
Hi Myriad:




I exchanged some emails with Christopher Bollyn about this WTC case and he referred to the famous picture as the one of “The Confused Fireman.” Since then the nickname just kind of stuck for me. Anyone experienced in this field knows that massive column (over his head) was NOT cut using any cutting torch. You guys can believe anything you wish.

GL,

Terral
Click to expand...

Don't be daft Terral, I've used oxy acetylene cutting torches, the flame can reduce steel to molten slag in seconds.

And they used Oxy Acetylene torches in the clean up.

Thermite on the other hand is a violent uncontrolled fireball, which burns downwards following gravity, it cannot produce neat cuts.
 
Terral said:
Why are you posting two sentences of ‘talk, talk, talk’ instead of making a case for Building Fires taking down WTC-7 on 9/11? :0) Your statement above is based upon Minadin’s own errant misstatements of the facts about heat energy and steel contained within a steel-framed network. Heat energy is constantly moving from the hot to cold areas of the network and never remains stationary for any ‘softening’ to even begin. So, your steel columns and beams are softening (heh) from 1000 degree temperatures, but what is the temperature of the adjacent steel columns and beams from your ridiculously small WTC-7 building fires? The fact is that the temperatures are reduced in direct proportion to the distance from the burning fire and the combustible fuel source. The entire WTC-7 steel frame network will heat up and spread the heat out evenly throughout the many series of connections, before even one component begins to soften and reduce load bearing capacity.
Terral
Click to expand...

Terral:you're understanding of thermodynamics is unbelievably primitive.
If I were to demonstrate such a poor understanding of heat transfer in my university (especially at this stage of my education), I am quite certain several professors would (rightly) demand that I not receive my degree, since I would plainly be unqualified to practice engineering.
To put it another way: heat does not magically flow throughout a substance at a constant temperature over the whole volume and through all connections.
Plainly, you have no experience with a welding torch, a cutting torch, or even a cooking range or a shiskabob on a barbeque.
And for the record: before beginning my engineering education, and for my first couple summers during, I worked in a metal fabrication shop. Mostly doing general labour, but I also operated the CNC plasma cutter. In addition, working on my Lincoln has required much use of oxy-acetylene torches.
So don't try to tell me that I don't know what I'm speaking about.
Oh, and this link should give you an introductory understanding of conduction. Just roll your mouse over the pictre of conduction and read. the important thing to notice is that one end of the rod is hotter than the other!
Were this not the case, my motorcycle engine would not need to have fins to help cool it down.

Or just follow HeyLeroy's link, copied here, for just one example.



Terral said:
<snip>
I received my first General Contractor License in the mid 1980’s
<snip>
Click to expand...

Really? Who are you licensed through? I'm sure they'd love to know how smart their licensees are. Maybe you'd even get a raise.


Terral said:
PS. We have a Mark Roberts Lover over at the Loose Change Board talking a bunch of junk on this thread. He says "Marky" (heh) posts here at the JREF Board. Do any of you know his user name? Supposedly he is a worthy debating opponent on these 9/11 Topics and I would very much like the opportunity to see if he is worth his salt. Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

You want to debate? That's rich. You do realize that in a debate, you would be expected to answer criticisms, right? And you'd have to be able to demonstrate support. Neither of which I have ever seen you do.

I can't speak for Mark, but were I in his position, you would not even be worth the time to say "no" to.

You have repeatedly demonstrated a complete ignorance of a multitude of scientific principals, and simultaneously shown a total unwillingness to consider any viewpoint that does not already align with your fanciful notions.
I bet you actually think you're winning in this thread, don't you?



Terral said:
Anyone experienced in this field knows that massive column (over his head) was NOT cut using any cutting torch. You guys can believe anything you wish.
Click to expand...

As I mentioned, I have experience in metal work. The surface pattern of the cut and the slag deposits make it fairly obvious that the beam was cut be a torch. I cannot say for certain if it was oxy-acetylene or plasma without a better picture, but since oxy-acetylene torches are more portable (no power requirements), that would be a more logical assumption.

I would sincerely love to know what experience you can bring up to demonstrate otherwise.

For the record:
this was cut with a plasma cutter
this was cut with an oxy-acetylene torch
A comparison

This site also has some very nice depictions, but I'll bet you're not going to read it.
 
Last edited:
Terral is choosing to ignore evidence...Wow, what a surprise!
So just to requote myself...

Terral, you make claim one of the firefighters in the photo looks confused....You ought to look at that photo again....Tell Me what you see above and in between those firefighters; Do you see another person there?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Terral said:
Hi NDBoston:




Yes. Can you explain to me how the building you worked in for three years including 9/11 collapsed due to building fires in just a few hours? We are talking about the Controlled Demolition Theory versus the Building Fires Theory, unless you have a third hypothesis. I received my first General Contractor License in the mid 1980’s and my father is a General Contractor and together we have demolished more buildings that perhaps everyone else here combined. I know WTC-7 contained a myriad of solid red-iron steel connections that had to be ‘severed’ using ‘cutter charges’ having NOTHING to do with any building fires. The symmetrical collapse is a Controlled Demolition Signature, just like all the 45-degree cuts found all over the place in the remaining stub columns and debris. The fact that the Loyal Bushie inside-job bad guys DUPED you and your buddies changes NOTHING about the evidence in this case. No natural phenomena has the stored energy potential to ‘sever’ ALL of the steel columns, girders, beams and bar-joists in the WTC-7 steel-framed network to cause the catastrophic symmetrical collapse of the entire structure in just a few hours.

Many of your ‘Fire Myths’ are debunked here with descriptions of ‘shaped charges.’

PS. We have a Mark Roberts Lover over at the Loose Change Board talking a bunch of junk on this thread. He says "Marky" (heh) posts here at the JREF Board. Do any of you know his user name? Supposedly he is a worthy debating opponent on these 9/11 Topics and I would very much like the opportunity to see if he is worth his salt. Thanks in advance,

GL,

Terral
Click to expand...

[Edited]

Attack the argument, not the arguer.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LibraryLady
 
Last edited by a moderator:
091.gif
 
Terral said:
Hi Enigma:




Yep. This looks like the best “Building Fires Took Down WTC-7” post I have seen anywhere on this thread. I suppose posting 3 sentences about “the supposed 'largest' truther board” proves as much as anything from anyone on your side of this debate. Where is the case for a few building fires taking down WTC-7 in just a few hours? Oh. None of you have even thought to make a case for anything. :0) You really believe that setting a few fires to run away will produce this result (picture). :0) And, you also think that arguing semantics over our use of ‘shaped charge’ terms is going to prove that Senor Bushie’s Building Fires took down WTC-7? :0) All I see here is chit-chat with some whining and complaining mixed in for good measure. You confuse fruitless activity with actually accomplishing something . . .

GL,

Terral
Click to expand...

You confuse fruitless activity with mindless masturbation.

As LibraryLady said - attack the argument, and not the arguer.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jmercer
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Terral said:
PS. We have a Mark Roberts Lover over at the Loose Change Board talking a bunch of junk on this thread. He says "Marky" (heh) posts here at the JREF Board. Do any of you know his user name? Supposedly he is a worthy debating opponent on these 9/11 Topics and I would very much like the opportunity to see if he is worth his salt.
Click to expand...

Why do you bother asking for a "worthy" debate opponent in this thread? I've only just browsed every entry up to this point, and when someone posts a reply totally destroying every point you make, you simply ignore it and cherrypick some short quip from someone else's reply and act dismissive of it... No real debate from you, though?
 
Terral said:
Hi NicePants:




Please forgive, but if you are not paying much attention, then nothing I say will make one lick of sense. Go back and read the post from where you took the quote to find this Christopher Bollyn article with the famous picture of the confused fireman. Then go down and reread his commentary, because I know you read every word the first time. :0)




To which Nicepants asks, “Which field are you referring to?” My statement agrees with Mr. Bollyn’s final assertion 100 percent that anyone experienced (the experts) in this (demolition) field knows damn good and well that no cutting torch on God’s green earth made that 45-degree angle cut. Why?

1. The debris in the area must be cleared, before the segmenting of larger steel members can even begin!

2. 45-degree angle cuts are dangerous and never used in typical demolition of massive steel members of this or any size. Fancy 45-degree cuts might look pretty, but they take much longer to make and waste precious fuel in the process.

3. Slag from a cutting torch solidifies instantly upon contacting the air and cannot possibly froth up and boil over into the inside ‘and’ outside of the column this way. That molten metal deposit was produced from a chemical reaction that exceed the minimum melting temperature (2800 degrees) of red-iron BY FAR, which finds 75 percent of the molten metal falling down the ‘outside’ of the column and 25 percent on the ‘inside.’ The reason is that the charges were placed on the ‘outside’ of this column and on this 45-degree angle to allow movement of the upper section back in our direction ‘during’ the Controlled Demolition process.

4. The fact that you have rows and rows of 45-degree angle cuts (like this) means the CD supervisor was moving entire column lines in one particular direction. You see a pattern of severed pedestals leaning in the direction of the ‘high point’ of the 45 degree angle in all the pictures, because the massive upper section ‘slid’ downward with all the building weight from above; and all the stub columns were pushed in the exact opposite direction.

5. If all of these 45-degree angle cuts were made by the steel workers in the months after 9/11, then they should exhibit a random pattern of cuts leaning in all four directions. However, careful examination of the evidence reveals a clear Demolition Signature for WTC-7. You can take that to the bank!

6. That is the reason all the WTC steel was removed from the scene, before any real investigation could even take place.

The reason you do not have tons of Demolition Experts speaking out against the Official Cover Story nonsense is because they want to stay in business. :0) If I was still a licensed Contractor in the field, then I would not be having this conversation with you right now. However, my children and their children are at risk of becoming the victims of the next 911-like attack (in Oakland, California), so here we are all dressed up in some NicePants with someplace to go. :0)

BTW, the CIT Chat-Monkeys are on the run over at the LC Board. I was sorry to see you got caught up in their nonsense. They have their hands full and do not now whether the mess themselves or go blind. :0)

GL,

Terral
Click to expand...

Well I'm telling you it was cut with a torch. Get off your butt and get in the real world.

We'll be waiting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom