"Building What": Geraldo At Large

[PhysicsExist]

Are you stupid enough to believe scattered fires and gravity produced 2.25 seconds of free fall?

Do you know what the definition of structural failure is?

Structural failures produce Freefall acceleration through the path of greatest resistance?

 

[Patriot911]

Are you stupid enough to believe scattered fires and gravity produced 2.25 seconds of free fall?

Do you know what the definition of structural failure is?

Structural failures produce Freefall acceleration through the path of greatest resistance?

They CAN! OMG you're starting to see the light!!!

 

[georgephillip]

Are you stupid enough to believe scattered fires and gravity produced 2.25 seconds of free fall?

Do you know what the definition of structural failure is?

"Structural failure refers to loss of the load-carrying capacity of a component or member within a structure or of the structure itself.

"Structural failure is initiated when the material is stressed to its strength limit, thus causing fracture or excessive deformations.

"In a well-designed system, a localized failure should not cause immediate or even progressive collapse of the entire structure.

"Ultimate failure strength is one of the limit states that must be accounted for in structural engineering and structural design."

 

[georgephillip]

“The collapse we see cannot be due to a column failure, or a few column failures, or a sequence of column failures.

"All 24 interior columns and 58 perimeter columns had to have been removed over the span of 8 floors low in the building simultaneously to within a small fraction of a second, and in such a way that the top half of the building remains intact and uncrumpled.”

"Only explosives can instantaneously remove 8 stories allowing the upper structure to accelerate downwards in free fall.

"The absolute free fall of Building 7 over a period of 2.25 seconds is by itself overwhelming evidence that explosives were used to bring down the building."

BuildingWhat?

 

[candycorn]

I am not going to be responding to your next post most likely. My point was proven by your response that you are a joke. Anyone that will come into this thread will see you dont cite sources, you dont use facts, you dont believe in Newtonian Physics, and cant stay on topic. Good Luck, and I wish a Admin could forward me your IP just for shits and giggles.

Run little bitch! You've been owned again!

The perpetrators are running scared. Stop assisting them.

Why would I assist truthtards? It is much more fun to make them cry.

If he's asking for your IP...isn't that a TOS Violation?

 

[PhysicsExist]

“The collapse we see cannot be due to a column failure, or a few column failures, or a sequence of column failures.

"All 24 interior columns and 58 perimeter columns had to have been removed over the span of 8 floors low in the building simultaneously to within a small fraction of a second, and in such a way that the top half of the building remains intact and uncrumpled.”

"Only explosives can instantaneously remove 8 stories allowing the upper structure to accelerate downwards in free fall.

"The absolute free fall of Building 7 over a period of 2.25 seconds is by itself overwhelming evidence that explosives were used to bring down the building."

BuildingWhat?

 

[candycorn]

“The collapse we see cannot be due to a column failure, or a few column failures, or a sequence of column failures.

"All 24 interior columns and 58 perimeter columns had to have been removed over the span of 8 floors low in the building simultaneously to within a small fraction of a second, and in such a way that the top half of the building remains intact and uncrumpled.”

"Only explosives can instantaneously remove 8 stories allowing the upper structure to accelerate downwards in free fall.

"The absolute free fall of Building 7 over a period of 2.25 seconds is by itself overwhelming evidence that explosives were used to bring down the building."

BuildingWhat?

 

[georgephillip]

The Nature of WTC7's Collapse

From a letter to "A Letter to a Die-Hard Supporter of the Official Explanation":

"If you think about the nature of the collapse, supposedly due to fire weakening the steel, you will agree that it would only be necessary to follow the early stages of the collapse to determine its character.

"If heat is the cause, the steel will weaken gradually and will start to sag in the region where the fire is most intense. At that moment the steel will have almost enough strength to hold up the weight of the building, but not quite. So we have the force of gravity acting downwards, trying to produce an acceleration of 32 feet per second per second, and the force of the hot steel pushing upwards, a force a bit less than that of gravity.

"Let us say we are looking at it at the moment when the strength has declined to the point where the steel is capable of pushing upwards with 90% of the force required to hold the building up against gravity. There would thus be a net downward force of 10% of gravity.

"Now acceleration is proportional to force and we have a net force of 10% of gravity so we would see an acceleration downwards of 3.2 feet per second per second.

"When you graph the data you find that the fall did not start with a motion which could be ascribed to a small net force of that order. The downward acceleration of the roof was very close to free fall right from the start, 30 feet per second per second, and continued at that rate until out of sight. There is no hint of a slow start. This tells us that the steel supports went from adequate strength to virtually no strength in an instant.

"For reasons stated above this is absolutely impossible if the loss of strength is due to the application of heat.

 

[Patriot911]

The Nature of WTC7's Collapse

From a letter to "A Letter to a Die-Hard Supporter of the Official Explanation":

"If you think about the nature of the collapse, supposedly due to fire weakening the steel, you will agree that it would only be necessary to follow the early stages of the collapse to determine its character.

"If heat is the cause, the steel will weaken gradually and will start to sag in the region where the fire is most intense. At that moment the steel will have almost enough strength to hold up the weight of the building, but not quite. So we have the force of gravity acting downwards, trying to produce an acceleration of 32 feet per second per second, and the force of the hot steel pushing upwards, a force a bit less than that of gravity.

"Let us say we are looking at it at the moment when the strength has declined to the point where the steel is capable of pushing upwards with 90% of the force required to hold the building up against gravity. There would thus be a net downward force of 10% of gravity.

"Now acceleration is proportional to force and we have a net force of 10% of gravity so we would see an acceleration downwards of 3.2 feet per second per second.

"When you graph the data you find that the fall did not start with a motion which could be ascribed to a small net force of that order. The downward acceleration of the roof was very close to free fall right from the start, 30 feet per second per second, and continued at that rate until out of sight. There is no hint of a slow start. This tells us that the steel supports went from adequate strength to virtually no strength in an instant.

"For reasons stated above this is absolutely impossible if the loss of strength is due to the application of heat.

When one starts with a bullshit assumption (pretending 10% of gravity means anything) one ends up with a bullshit conclusion.

Why is it truthtards can't understand a sudden failure? Steel is brittle. Put steel under a lot of pressure, heat it up to the point of failure and it can snap. You go from 100% support to 0% support in a heartbeat.

 

[georgephillip]

Links?

 

[georgephillip]

"All 24 interior columns and 58 perimeter columns had to have been removed over the span of 8 floors low in the building simultaneously to within a small fraction of a second,..."

Is steel that brittle?

BuildingWhat?BuildingWhat? - A TV Ad Campaign to Raise Awareness of Building 7 - Free Fall Collapse

 

[Gamolon]

Are you stupid enough to believe scattered fires and gravity produced 2.25 seconds of free fall?

Do you know what the definition of structural failure is?

Structural failures produce Freefall acceleration through the path of greatest resistance?

Do you know how steel structures are designed? Do you understand load distribution?

I said this in the other thread, but you folks just can't grasp it. All the individual structural components (beams, columns, etc.) are tied together with connections (bolts, welds, etc.). This "network" of connected, individual components work together as a whole to support a finite weight limit. This means that structural engineers perform calculations for stress levels to see what the current structural can hold.

If you start to fail certain components within that "network", the other components have to pick up the slack of the weakened/failed component (a columns for example).

I used this example before. Let's take two people. We'll take a 3" diameter, 10' long steel pipe filled with concrete. We'll put each person on each end of the pipe to hold it up. Your jobs are to stay rigid and old the pipe up and horizontal. Think about the weight supported by each person. They BOTH take part in holding the load up.

Now, one person drops one end of the pipe. The other person is now responsible for keeping the entire pipe horizontal ALONE and from one end. That person is probably not "designed" to be strong enough to keep that pipe horizontal all alone and will "fail" by either dropping the pipe or falling forward due to the weight.

Do you understand that scenario?

 

[Gamolon]

2: There is no bowing or bending of the structure, thus eliminating the fires inside breaking apart the beams over 5 hours. So in this case how does a building remove 8 floors for a complete freefall?

What's between those 8 floors? You make it sound like WTC7 was a solid entity. Isn't there air between those floors?

 

[Patriot911]

"All 24 interior columns and 58 perimeter columns had to have been removed over the span of 8 floors low in the building simultaneously to within a small fraction of a second,..."

Is steel that brittle?

BuildingWhat?BuildingWhat? - A TV Ad Campaign to Raise Awareness of Building 7 - Free Fall Collapse

When you start with bullshit, you end with bullshit. Claiming all 24 colums and 58 perimeter columns had to be removed at exactly the same time is pure bullshit.

But hey. Let's run with it.

So it is your conclusion that all 24 interior columns and 58 perimeter columns had to be removed within a small fraction of a second. Well, that rules out thermate or thermite. So we're talking high explosives ala controlled demolition.

The smallest explosive charge needed to remove column 79 (the one that initially failed) would create the equivalent sound of a gun shot going off right next to you.... if the blast were to go off half a mile away in an urban setting. BUT... you claim it HAD to be more than one column. You're talking about 24 interior columns (big charges) and 58 perimeter columns (not quite as big) going off within a second.

Yet nobody heard anything even approaching what one would expect.

Yet seismographs both in downtown Manhattan and the far more sensitive ones at the permanent site at Lamont Doherty didn't record anything resembling explosives going off.

Yet nobody found A column or perimeter column cut by demolitions charges despute there being 82 columns you claim had to be cut. They DID find columns that had suffered failure due to heat and stress.

Yet nobody found evidence of explosives being used at all. No blasting caps. No wiring. Nothing.

So tell us, GP..... knowing what you know now, how did anyone do it? There is no such thing as silent explosives.

 

[Gamolon]

"All 24 interior columns and 58 perimeter columns had to have been removed over the span of 8 floors low in the building simultaneously to within a small fraction of a second,..."

You mean over-stressing interior columns and perimeter columns to a point that the fail is not the same as "removing them"?

 

[georgephillip]

CORE DENIAL?

"Each tower was supported by a structural core extending from its bedrock foundation to its roof. The cores were rectangular pillars with numerous large columns and girders, measuring 87 feet by 133 feet.

"The core structures housed the elevators, stairs, and other services.

"The cores had their own flooring systems, which were structurally independent of the floor diaphragms that spanned the space between the cores and the perimeter walls.

"The core structures, like the perimeter wall structures, were 100 percent steel-framed.

"The exact dimensions, arrangement, and number of the core columns remained somewhat mysterious until the publication of a leaked collection of detailed architectural drawings of the North Tower in 2007.

"Although the drawings show the dimensions and arrangement of core columns, they do not show other engineering details such as the core floor framing.

"It is clear from photographs, such as the one on the right, that the core columns were abundantly cross-braced.

"Core Denial

"Establishing the true nature of the core structures is of great importance given that the most widely read document on the World Trade Center attack -- the 9/11 Commission Report -- denies their very existence, claiming the towers' cores were 'hollow steel shaft:'"

 

[georgephillip]

"all 24 interior columns and 58 perimeter columns had to have been removed over the span of 8 floors low in the building simultaneously to within a small fraction of a second,..."

is steel that brittle?

Buildingwhat?buildingwhat? - a tv ad campaign to raise awareness of building 7 - free fall collapse

when you start with bullshit, you end with bullshit. Claiming all 24 colums and 58 perimeter columns had to be removed at exactly the same time is pure bullshit.

But hey. Let's run with it.

So it is your conclusion that all 24 interior columns and 58 perimeter columns had to be removed within a small fraction of a second. Well, that rules out thermate or thermite. So we're talking high explosives ala controlled demolition.

The smallest explosive charge needed to remove column 79 (the one that initially failed) would create the equivalent sound of a gun shot going off right next to you.... If the blast were to go off half a mile away in an urban setting. But... You claim it had to be more than one column. You're talking about 24 interior columns (big charges) and 58 perimeter columns (not quite as big) going off within a second.

Yet nobody heard anything even approaching what one would expect.

Yet seismographs both in downtown manhattan and the far more sensitive ones at the permanent site at lamont doherty didn't record anything resembling explosives going off.

Yet nobody found a column or perimeter column cut by demolitions charges despute there being 82 columns you claim had to be cut. They did find columns that had suffered failure due to heat and stress.

Yet nobody found evidence of explosives being used at all. No blasting caps. No wiring. Nothing.

So tell us, gp..... Knowing what you know now, how did anyone do it? There is no such thing as silent explosives.

links?

 

[Patriot911]

CORE DENIAL?

"Each tower was supported by a structural core extending from its bedrock foundation to its roof. The cores were rectangular pillars with numerous large columns and girders, measuring 87 feet by 133 feet.

"The core structures housed the elevators, stairs, and other services.

"The cores had their own flooring systems, which were structurally independent of the floor diaphragms that spanned the space between the cores and the perimeter walls.

"The core structures, like the perimeter wall structures, were 100 percent steel-framed.

"The exact dimensions, arrangement, and number of the core columns remained somewhat mysterious until the publication of a leaked collection of detailed architectural drawings of the North Tower in 2007.

"Although the drawings show the dimensions and arrangement of core columns, they do not show other engineering details such as the core floor framing.

"It is clear from photographs, such as the one on the right, that the core columns were abundantly cross-braced.

"Core Denial

"Establishing the true nature of the core structures is of great importance given that the most widely read document on the World Trade Center attack -- the 9/11 Commission Report -- denies their very existence, claiming the towers' cores were 'hollow steel shaft:'"

You're talking about the towers now. What happened to WTC 7?

 

[Patriot911]

"all 24 interior columns and 58 perimeter columns had to have been removed over the span of 8 floors low in the building simultaneously to within a small fraction of a second,..."

is steel that brittle?

Buildingwhat?buildingwhat? - a tv ad campaign to raise awareness of building 7 - free fall collapse

when you start with bullshit, you end with bullshit. Claiming all 24 colums and 58 perimeter columns had to be removed at exactly the same time is pure bullshit.

But hey. Let's run with it.

So it is your conclusion that all 24 interior columns and 58 perimeter columns had to be removed within a small fraction of a second. Well, that rules out thermate or thermite. So we're talking high explosives ala controlled demolition.

The smallest explosive charge needed to remove column 79 (the one that initially failed) would create the equivalent sound of a gun shot going off right next to you.... If the blast were to go off half a mile away in an urban setting. But... You claim it had to be more than one column. You're talking about 24 interior columns (big charges) and 58 perimeter columns (not quite as big) going off within a second.

Yet nobody heard anything even approaching what one would expect.

Yet seismographs both in downtown manhattan and the far more sensitive ones at the permanent site at lamont doherty didn't record anything resembling explosives going off.

Yet nobody found a column or perimeter column cut by demolitions charges despute there being 82 columns you claim had to be cut. They did find columns that had suffered failure due to heat and stress.

Yet nobody found evidence of explosives being used at all. No blasting caps. No wiring. Nothing.

So tell us, gp..... Knowing what you know now, how did anyone do it? There is no such thing as silent explosives.

links?

Would you actually believe them and take them into consideration if I linked sources to back up each of my claims?

 

[tempesta29]

When you start with bullshit, you end with bullshit. Claiming all 24 colums and 58 perimeter columns had to be removed at exactly the same time is pure bullshit.

But hey. Let's run with it.

Let's do run with it, because if columns hadn't been removed in such a fashion, free fall would never have occurred. You can bark all you want. That's physics. If a building is falling at the same speed as a brick through the air for a period of 2.25 seconds, then every single column, both perimeter and core, would had to have been removed floor by floor, simultaneously over about 8 floors.

We will await your demonstration of fire's capability of producing such a result.