simple question for the WTC collapse

[Toddsterpatriot]

In theory, this is possible, if the jet's impact got lucky. But in reality, both cores survived the jet impacts. Which was pretty easy for Tower Two since the jet flew the corner of Tower Two and missed the core. And while there's little doubt that the jet impacts took out floor supports where the jet punched holes in the steel curtain wall (they took out the entire wall) yet those holes did not result in any floor collapses.

The buildings were designed to withstand jet impacts and they held up beautifully. It took demolition to bring them down.

yet those holes did not result in any floor collapses.

Sure they did. It took a while.

 

[Derideo_Te]

eots answer tells you where it went and also you can look at next day pics of ground zero... these guys claim that the debris fell straight down and managed to pulverized steel concrete structures and shred thick steel beams from the structure, so where is this pile of debris that weighs so much? Roughly one story of it actually landed on the WTC tower footprints, that's about 1/15th of what fell down. So when I say most of it was thrown outward, I'm actually making an understatement, damn near all of it was either thrown outward or pulverized into dust... by the demolition.

Indeed..
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isTTUaawGBU]WTC1 Debris vaporizes into thin air - YouTube[/ame]

Concrete is brittle and shatters upon impact. When you have thousands of tons of steel falling from 1300' it will pulverize concrete into dust. The air pressure on the lower floors as they collapsed was more than enough to blow that concrete dust outwards since it had nowhere else to go. There were no explosives and no demolition. There is no evidence of any explosives or demolition either. There is evidence of massive impacts capable of destroying the integrity of both the core and the curtain walls. There is evidence of a raging fires fueled by thousands of gallons of aviation fuel. When metal under pressure is heated it deforms. Those are irrefutable reproducible facts. There are no facts for any "demolition".

 

[eots]

eots answer tells you where it went and also you can look at next day pics of ground zero... these guys claim that the debris fell straight down and managed to pulverized steel concrete structures and shred thick steel beams from the structure, so where is this pile of debris that weighs so much? Roughly one story of it actually landed on the WTC tower footprints, that's about 1/15th of what fell down. So when I say most of it was thrown outward, I'm actually making an understatement, damn near all of it was either thrown outward or pulverized into dust... by the demolition.

Indeed..
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isTTUaawGBU]WTC1 Debris vaporizes into thin air - YouTube[/ame]

Concrete is brittle and shatters upon impact. When you have thousands of tons of steel falling from 1300' it will pulverize concrete into dust.

Funny this is not the case with all other building collapses

The air pressure on the lower floors as they collapsed was more than enough to blow that concrete dust outwards since it had nowhere else to go

.

all that resilience yet the tower collapse in a matter of secs

There were no explosives and no demolition. There is no evidence of any explosives or demolition either.

no testing for explosives was done

There is evidence of massive impacts capable of destroying the integrity of both the core and the curtain walls.

if you call a computer simulation by NIST evidence

There is evidence of a raging fires fueled by thousands of gallons of aviation fuel.

Even NIST coincides the initial fireball burned up most of the fuel

When metal under pressure is heated it deforms. Those are irrefutable reproducible facts. There are no facts for any "demolition

there is no evidence in forensic testing of the steel to show temperatures anywhere near what NIST predicted as required to cause structural failure

 

[eots]

The buildings were designed to withstand jet impacts and they held up beautifully. It took demolition to bring them down.

Correct. They DID hold up to the jet impacts. It was the fire that further weakened the reaming components to fail.

so office fires brought down the towers as well as building 7...yet firefighters made it to the 79th floor reporting 2 small fires sec before the collapse

 

[Derideo_Te]

The buildings were designed to withstand jet impacts and they held up beautifully. It took demolition to bring them down.

Correct. They DID hold up to the jet impacts. It was the fire that further weakened the reaming components to fail.

so office fires brought down the towers as well as building 7...yet firefighters made it to the 79th floor reporting 2 small fires sec before the collapse

Did you miss the pictures of the flames and towering plumes of black smoke pouring out of the buildings from the impact sites?

 

[eots]

Correct. They DID hold up to the jet impacts. It was the fire that further weakened the reaming components to fail.

so office fires brought down the towers as well as building 7...yet firefighters made it to the 79th floor reporting 2 small fires sec before the collapse

Did you miss the pictures of the flames and towering plumes of black smoke pouring out of the buildings from the impact sites?

the top photo is enhanced anyone can see that.. the other two show smoke

 

[eots]

No, that's your false information, all three buildings fell at free fall speeds and that's widely available on the internet, someone has it posted in this thread. You are posting Lies, that's all. And you are labeling the truth I'm posting as "garbage information". So, you have an agenda, you are out to push, which is to smear the truth with disinformation. You aren't discussing anything, neither are you engaged in discussion, you are just attacking the truth with your own bag of Lies and disinformation. I've patiently answered as many of your false posts as I could and you respond by calling the truth a bunch of garbage. So you have an agenda to discredit the truth in this area. I've noticed a couple of your cohorts are busy tossing negative reputation at my posts in this thread, so they are attacking like jackals while you are attacking with false debate, but the group of you obviously came here to attack the thread, not discuss it.

From what I remember of the various 9/11 threads I've participated in here, even most of the inside job theorists don't claim the buildings fell at free fall speed for the entirety of their collapses. I think it's usually a claim of free fall speed for a portion of the collapse.

Nist coincides to fee-fall occurring on building 7

 

[eots]

and the towers fell at free fall acceleration.

Then why did total collapse times take almost double the time for something to fall at free fall?

More garbage information from you. You debunk yourself.

because some of the collapse is obscured by pulverized concrete they are able to add a few secs ...near free fall is still an absurd concept regardless

 

[eots]

Syham Sunder of NIST can explain it for you


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C15KxDhqxNc]9/11 Debunked; World Trade Center- no Free-Fall speeds? Let's ask Shyam Sunder.. - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Derideo_Te]

Indeed..
WTC1 Debris vaporizes into thin air - YouTube

Funny this is not the case with all other building collapses

.

Not all buildings have identical construction.

all that resilience yet the tower collapse in a matter of secs

There can be no accurate timing since the final impact was completely obscured.

no testing for explosives was done

So your point is....?

if you call a computer simulation by NIST evidence

Evidence in the form of pictures, videos, debris and strengths of materials.

Even NIST coincides the initial fireball burned up most of the fuel

The floors were filled with combustible materials. So were the planes. Have you ever seen magnesium burning?

When metal under pressure is heated it deforms. Those are irrefutable reproducible facts. There are no facts for any "demolition

there is no evidence in forensic testing of the steel to show temperatures anywhere near what NIST predicted as required to cause structural failure

You don't need forensic testing. Any standard textbook on Strengths of Materials will reflect the loss of resistance when metals are subjected to higher temperatures. For example;

http://www.centuryspring.com/pdfs/377-381APPENDIX-A.pdf

Temperature Effects

When extension and compression springs are subjected
to heat while under stress there is some loss of their
load carrying capability. The extent of this loss is related
to the temperature reached and to the stress the given
spring material is under. The loss-due-to-heat
characteristics are presented in the data below. These
data reflect the loss trends more than they represent the
absolute load losses for all spring configurations.

 

[eots]

.

Not all buildings have identical construction.There can be no accurate timing since the final impact was completely obscured. So your point is....?Evidence in the form of pictures, videos, debris and strengths of materials.The floors were filled with combustible materials. So were the planes. Have you ever seen magnesium burning?

office fires do not cause buildings to collapse completely in secs

You don't need forensic testing. Any standard textbook on Strengths of Materials will reflect the loss of resistance when metals are subjected to higher temperatures. For example;

http://www.centuryspring.com/pdfs/377-381APPENDIX-A.pdf

Temperature Effects

When extension and compression springs are subjected
to heat while under stress there is some loss of their
load carrying capability. The extent of this loss is related
to the temperature reached and to the stress the given
spring material is under. The loss-due-to-heat
characteristics are presented in the data below. These
data reflect the loss trends more than they represent the
absolute load losses for all spring configurations.

so any amount of heat will cause a building to collapse ?..of course you need forensic testing to determine what temperatures occurred to validate your theory

 

[eots]

'although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris they have."
OpEdNews - Page 2 of Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

 

[Derideo_Te]

office fires do not cause buildings to collapse completely in secs

so any amount of heat will cause a building to collapse ?..of course you need forensic testing to determine what temperatures occurred to validate your theory

The office fires were one of the factors in the collapse. So was the original construction, the impact speeds, the weight of the planes, the angles of impact, the damage they caused to the curtain walls and the damage caused to the central cores. All of which were contributing factors.

Your second fallacy is attributing the collapse solely to the heat from the fires. All there needed to be was sufficient heat to cause enough sag in the floor trusses to enable them to pull away from the remaining supports. The fires were burning for more than long enough for the metal to have reached that point on at least one of the floors given the extent of the visible damage to the outer curtain walls.

 

[Days]

All three buildings fell at free fall speeds. That's an honest assessment of how they fell. Any truth can be twisted. It's possible to attack any idea, when I was in college a fellow student in my integral calculus class showed me the proof that 1+1=3. It was a valid proof. But it was also a Lie. If you come here and argue that 100 + 100 = 300 because of the proof that 1+1=3, you would be intellectually dishonest. And when you come here and call all the truths I've presented "garbage information" while presenting nothing but Lies, distortion, and disinformation that they obviously know are exactly that, that is intellectual dishonesty at its worse. Perhaps they are paid to do so or perhaps they have corrupt minds, no matter, they are still Lying and attacking the truth. I posted a thread on radiation levels during the Apollo flights and nobody showed up. I posted this thread and a pack of jackals pops in and starts ripping flesh. You don't think that's terribly obvious to me? This isn't unique behavior, it has accompanied 09/11 postings on the internet for 10 years.

 

[Days]

The thread is there for anyone to read and determine who is posting disinformation and twisting the truth. All you are doing is validating that you came here for the express intent of attacking my posts... you might as well admit that much... it's the only posting you have here.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

All three buildings fell at free fall speeds. That's an honest assessment of how they fell. Any truth can be twisted. It's possible to attack any idea, when I was in college a fellow student in my integral calculus class showed me the proof that 1+1=3. It was a valid proof. But it was also a Lie. If you come here and argue that 100 + 100 = 300 because of the proof that 1+1=3, you would be intellectually dishonest. And when you come here and call all the truths I've presented "garbage information" while presenting nothing but Lies, distortion, and disinformation that they obviously know are exactly that, that is intellectual dishonesty at its worse. Perhaps they are paid to do so or perhaps they have corrupt minds, no matter, they are still Lying and attacking the truth. I posted a thread on radiation levels during the Apollo flights and nobody showed up. I posted this thread and a pack of jackals pops in and starts ripping flesh. You don't think that's terribly obvious to me? This isn't unique behavior, it has accompanied 09/11 postings on the internet for 10 years.

All three buildings fell at free fall speeds.

No they didn't.

 

[Days]

sorry, yes, they did. The roof lines accelerated at free fall speed. fact.

You are another one, not being honest, not seeking open discussion of how WTC design failed, just seeking to attack any opinion that doesn't match your own. You came into this thread with your agenda, distorting the truth, trying to ply a completely false view of the engineering. You pretend that the WTC design was inferior according to your disinformation. I replied it was a vertical truss, it was the strongest skyscraper ever built, all of which is true, and all of which you are attacking and trying to discredit. You even joined ernie in tossing negative reputation at posts in your sick attack on the truth they presented.

I've been a preacher for over 30 years. I can discern the spirit of your attack. It isn't hard. You don't make it hard. You make it easy. If it attacks like a jackal, it is the spirit of a jackal.

 

[eots]

all three buildings fell at free fall speeds. That's an honest assessment of how they fell. Any truth can be twisted. It's possible to attack any idea, when i was in college a fellow student in my integral calculus class showed me the proof that 1+1=3. It was a valid proof. But it was also a lie. If you come here and argue that 100 + 100 = 300 because of the proof that 1+1=3, you would be intellectually dishonest. And when you come here and call all the truths i've presented "garbage information" while presenting nothing but lies, distortion, and disinformation that they obviously know are exactly that, that is intellectual dishonesty at its worse. Perhaps they are paid to do so or perhaps they have corrupt minds, no matter, they are still lying and attacking the truth. I posted a thread on radiation levels during the apollo flights and nobody showed up. I posted this thread and a pack of jackals pops in and starts ripping flesh. You don't think that's terribly obvious to me? This isn't unique behavior, it has accompanied 09/11 postings on the internet for 10 years.

all three buildings fell at free fall speeds.

no they didn't.

so you disagree with syham sunder of NIST

 

[Days]

this is a pack of jackals, they aren't being the least bit honest, nor are they trying to be.

 

[Days]

It will be a cold day in hell when I need to learn how to direct my posts in a thread from you. I have over ten years experience doing that and my posts are placed exactly where they belong... yours, on OTOH, and consistently misplaced and tossed about nilly-willy in the thread. All you are doing is making as big a mess of the thread as you possibly could. That's not brand new to me, Ollie, I've been watching hucksters post like that for over a decade. It's called disinformation, at least it is one more part of posting disinformation.... attempting to cloud the issue and confuse the reader. I've never seen anyone more blatant about making their droppings than you. You must be proud.