Split Thread WTC7 is a problem for the 9/11 official story

[BigAl]

Originally Posted by bill smith
Nanothermite is a whole other beast by comparison to regular thermite. NG know that so if they did not report on it in detail in their documentaary on thermite they are being deliberately misleading. The fix like I said.

Every technical description of nano-thermite describes it as being energetic or having high brisance. These are technical descriptions that mean BOOM .

Nobody heard BOOM at WTC on 9/11.

Pound-for-pound, the Nano-thermite chemical reaction produces the same heat as ordinary thermite. This means that your concept of what happened at WTC still calls for as much as 30,000 tons or 300,000 cubic feet or almost 400 tractor trailer loads of the stuff, be it thermite, thermate, or nano-thermite.

That would be a lot of BOOM .

 

[jaydeehess]

The aircraft impacts removed a significant load carrying capacity from the structure, tore away the sprinkler and standpipe systems, abraded significant amounts of spray on fire insulation, immediatly started a multi-floor, widespread office fire (a situation that never, ever occurs in 'normal ' office fires), and added 100 tons of debris (give or take) to the impact floors.

Yeah other than that they had nothing to do with the collapses.

Let's have it right - the planes gave both buildings a hell of a whack, took big chunks out of each of them and they remained standing for +/- a hour. Then, apparently, all the steel either turns to rubber or becomes as brittle as a pensioners bones, and down the lot comes. I'm suggesting the collapse could have been initiated within the core and it wouldn't look any different than what happened on the day; you are saying it would be remarkably, or noticeably different.

Instead of just shouting "HUSH-A-BOOM" and other childish crap, imagine that there was something set off inside the towers core and describe to me how it would be different?

I mentioned "Hush-a Boom"?

You quote my post in which I address your contention that NIST stated that the aircraft impact did not affect the collapse and then run off in another direction in a reply.

Why would you do that?
Why would you just not admit that you completely misrepresented what NIST stated?

Now you again completely misrepresent the vast amount of data that has been compiled since steel was first used to construct high rises by cynically claiming that the steel suddenly turned to rubber. Of course that is not what occured. It progressively weakend and sagged. This is quite evident as the perimeter column system slowly buckled. That is evidence of the core having crept downwards putting more load on the perimeter, slowly. That allows time for loads to be redistributed but at some point you have most of the columns taking as much load as they can possibly handle as the heat continues to cause a sagging and further redistribution. At that point , very quickly all columns will have more load than they can support and they fail, quickly.

The falling mass of the upper section will now impact what? It will not be primarily impacting the columns and the columns are the ONLY structural members that could possibly take such a load. Floor pans are designed for floor loads. Every floor would be designed pretty much the same and would definately not be designed to carry the static or dynamic load of the upper section hitting one. It would be like stepping on a paper cup. This simply adds to the mass that is falling to the next floor down.

The perimeter columns now have no support and peel away outward.

The core could not have stood alone without the lateral support of the perimeter column system and buckling due to its instability but lagging slightly behind the tearing away of the floors.


The ONLY differences between what you seem to be contending and what NIST stated is that you cannot envision that office fires could supply enough heat, you minimize the effect of aircraft impact, you ignore the fact that dumping thousands of gallons of accellerant onto serveral floors would immediatly produce an office fire the size of which in common circumstances would have taken several hours.

In short yours is a knee jerk, uninformed and ignorant view that is coloured primarily by a political stance.

 

[Toke]

I find Ragnarok a bit hard to pin down on any specific claim/story.

If he really belived in any story why does he not stick to it?

 

[DavidJames]

If he really belived in any story why does he not stick to it?

He's no different then any of the other regular CTists these days.

He's here to feed his ego and pretend he can play with the adults.

 

[jaydeehess]

I find Ragnarok a bit hard to pin down on any specific claim/story.

If he really belived in any story why does he not stick to it?

Nor will he even stick to a topic, as evidenced in my last post.

Its the well known truther two step, and ah-one, and ah-two and a cha-cha-cha,,,,(ok I mixed dance moves, sue me)

 

[Toke]

I see, he does not really belive in any of his stories.
It is just some dance/sticking it to the man, and pretending to to be something.

 

[jaydeehess]

Perhaps he believes he is engaged in a battle of wits and its all an intellectual game. He is unaware that he has not scored a 'point' yet.

 

[jaydeehess]

I could really confuse him and bring up what occurs when sagged hot steel structural members cool down.

 

[DavidJames]

I see, he does not really belive in any of his stories.
It is just some dance/sticking it to the man, and pretending to to be something.

Regardless of what they really believe (whether by conscious choice or not), I think you are basically correct with your 2nd sentence.

 

[triforcharity]

Too bad he brought a bananna to a knife fight.

He is in a battle of wits, he just doesn't realize that he is unarmed.

 

[Slayhamlet]

It's an hypothesis and a damn sight stronger one than Bazant's on WTC1.

Yours isn't even an hypothesis.

 

[Ragnarok]

Perhaps he believes he is engaged in a battle of wits and its all an intellectual game. He is unaware that he has not scored a 'point' yet.

If you are 'keeping score' you obviously see it as a game yourself. Pot, meet kettle.

 

[Toke]

If you are 'keeping score' you obviously see it as a game yourself. Pot, meet kettle.

Why do you keep spewing truther lies if you don´t belive in any of them yoursefl?

 

[Ragnarok]

Why do you keep spewing truther lies if you don´t belive in any of them yoursefl?

Let's say I have this tapestry laid out before me and I'm just cutting off the annoying loose threads.

To you people who have made it a mission to defend the official theory, all this might be very frustrating, but you are not compelled to respond to my posts.

 

[funk de fino]

Let's say I have this tapestry laid out before me and I'm just cutting off the annoying loose threads.

To you people who have made it a mission to defend the official theory, all this might be very frustrating, but you are not compelled to respond to my posts.

People do not defend the official theory they just mostly point out your lies and mistakes.

 

[Toke]

Let's say I have this tapestry laid out before me and I'm just cutting off the annoying loose threads.

Sounds pretty, and rather meaningsless.

 

[Ragnarok]

Has this link been ripped apart yet?

http://911review.com/articles/ryan/nist_thermite_connection.html

 

[BigAl]

Has this link been ripped apart yet?

http://911review.com/articles/ryan/nist_thermite_connection.html

Troll much?

From that URL;

Forman Williams, the lead engineer on NIST’s advisory committee, and the most prominent engineering expert for Popular Mechanics, is an expert on the deflagration of energetic materials

Hint: Any time someone speaks of "deflagration of energetic materials", he's speaking of BOOM.

Nobody heard BOOM at WTC.

There is absolutely no evidence from WTC that can only be explained by thermite or alleged thermite ingredients found at WTC.

I've just put you on ignore.

See Ya!

 

[Ragnarok]

Troll much?

From that URL;



Hint: Any time someone speaks of "deflagration of energetic materials", he's speaking of BOOM.

Nobody heard BOOM at WTC.

There is absolutely no evidence from WTC that can only be explained by thermite or alleged thermite ingredients found at WTC.

I've just put you on ignore.

See Ya!

Wow, I wonder why the author of the site didn't think of that? You must be extra smart! You seem to be a little obsessed with this "bombs go BOOM!" business, don't y'all.

 

[dtugg]

Wow, I wonder why the author of the site didn't think of that?

Because he's a fraudlent idiot.