The NIST 9-11 Report on the WTC Collapse

[eots]

sayit i'm guessing it would have to have been a fucking large explosive (like a hiroshima nuke) and if that building was so structurally vunerable why do you doubt the rest of the nist report on 7's collapse?

eots
according to nist it would be.."as loud as a shot-gun blast or speakers at a rock concert...but hey what does nist know,,,right ??

it was not an altered version you ninny..it was my response from memory to your crazy comment about hiroshima nukes and contradicting the nist collapse theory ..once again .. Nist determined that the building was not structurally vulnerable and the failure of that single column under any circumstance would have resulted in initiation of the collapse sequence...you know.. Nist...the theory you claim to support ?...

uh-huh. And you still can't see the diff between the "as loud as a shot-gun blast or speakers at a rock concert" bs you posted and the "10 times louder than speakers at rock concert" from the nist q&a session?

you mean the nist report that says..the structural integrity of the building was not a factor in the collapse..yet you claim it is every-time building 7 is mentioned ?...that nist report ?

 

[eots]

Uh-huh.
Now compare that with your original, altered version of the NIST statement which started this discourse and which you even contained in quotes:
"as loud as a shot-gun blast or speakers at a rock concert..."
You not only conveniently "forgot" to provide a link, you failed to include the part about "10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert."
You can wiggle and squirm all you like Princess, but the truth is there for all to see and I will not be letting you off the hook.
Your original post (#132 of this thread):
"according to NIST it would be.."as loud as a shot-gun blast or speakers at a rock concert...but hey what does NIST know,,,right ??
http://www.usmessageboard.com/consp...eve-the-official-911-story-9.html#post6973517

Oh STFU you whiny hypocritical asshole lying little bitch. You have no legs to stand on and no room to speak when it comes to substantiating any of your positions, and think you can escape from answering what is relevant to the thread by posting such BS..

Try as you may you can't save (ID)eots from himself and the damage his lying does to your "cause." Joining him down that road just adds to your own mendacious stench, Princess.

I misread a portion of the qoute..the as loud as a shot gun blast was accurate and what else that is compared to is not all that relevant anyway..but your claims are knowingly false..as loud as a Hiroshima nuke"..and repeating the old popular mechanics claims about how damage factored into the collapse long since rejected by NIst

.

 

[SAYIT]

eots didn't lie.

sure he did and given all the info here you are now lying in his defense.
He quoted the nist as having said the noise from an explosion necessary to destroy 7's central support could have been as little as "speakers at a rock concert" when in truth they had said "10 times louder than speakers at a rock concert."
now in your mind that doesn't constitute a lie but then your integrity doesn't pass muster either, mr.

the nist quote was as loud as a shot gun blast or ten times louder than speakers at a rock concert but your inane claim was it was as loud as a hiroshima nuke..lol

BS, yet sooo typical of you. There is no getting around the fact that judging by the noise level there was no blast large enough to destroy a critical support and you lied about the NIST statement you quoted in a lame effort to prove there was.

 

[daws101]

Did investigators consider the possibility that an explosion caused or contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?

Yes, this possibility was investigated carefully. NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.

In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses. According to calculations by the investigation team, the smallest blast capable of failing the building's critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 decibels (dB) to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile, if unobstructed by surrounding buildings. This sound level is consistent with a gunshot blast, standing next to a jet plane engine, and more than 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert.

For the building to have been prepared for intentional demolition, walls and/or column enclosures and fireproofing would have to be removed and replaced without being detected. Preparing a column includes steps such as cutting sections with torches, which produces noxious and odorous fumes. Intentional demolition usually requires applying explosive charges to most, if not all, interior columns, not just one or a limited set of columns in a building.

Is it possible that thermite or thermate contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?

NIST has looked at the application and use of thermite and has determined that its use to sever columns in WTC 7 on 9/11/01 was unlikely.

Thermite is a combination of aluminum powder and a metal oxide that releases a tremendous amount of heat when ignited. It is typically used to weld railroad rails together by melting a small quantity of steel and pouring the melted steel into a form between the two rails.

To apply thermite to a large steel column, approximately 0.13 lb of thermite would be needed to heat and melt each pound of steel. For a steel column that weighs approximately 1,000 lbs. per foot, at least 100 lbs. of thermite would need to be placed around the column, ignited, and remain in contact with the vertical steel surface as the thermite reaction took place. This is for one column . presumably, more than one column would have been prepared with thermite, if this approach were to be used.

It is unlikely that 100 lbs. of thermite, or more, could have been carried into WTC 7 and placed around columns without being detected, either prior to Sept. 11 or during that day.

Given the fires that were observed that day, and the demonstrated structural response to the fires, NIST does not believe that thermite was used to fail any columns in WTC 7.

Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC buildings, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard used for interior partitions.

An emergency responder caught in the building between the 6th and 8th floors says he heard two loud booms. Isn't that evidence that there was an explosion?

The sound levels reported by all witnesses do not match the sound level of an explosion that would have been required to cause the collapse of the building. If the two loud booms were due to explosions that were responsible for the collapse of WTC 7, the emergency responder-located somewhere between the 6th and 8th floors in WTC 7-would not have been able to survive the near immediate collapse and provide this witness account.
Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation

 

[SAYIT]

it was not an altered version you ninny..it was my response from memory to your crazy comment about hiroshima nukes and contradicting the nist collapse theory ..once again .. Nist determined that the building was not structurally vulnerable and the failure of that single column under any circumstance would have resulted in initiation of the collapse sequence...you know.. Nist...the theory you claim to support ?...

uh-huh. And you still can't see the diff between the "as loud as a shot-gun blast or speakers at a rock concert" bs you posted and the "10 times louder than speakers at rock concert" from the nist q&a session?

you mean the nist report that says..the structural integrity of the building was not a factor in the collapse..yet you claim it is every-time building 7 is mentioned ?...that nist report ?

Another of your ever growing list of lies. I neither mention 7's structural integrity in every post nor did I make a claim about it. I did question whether you were making that claim. I am not an engineer and, unlike all you CT "experts," I don't pretend to be.
Frankly, Princess, if I lied as regularly as you do I'd change my SN once a week because I'd be embarassed. You apparently have no shame or integrity.

 

[daws101]

uh-huh. And you still can't see the diff between the "as loud as a shot-gun blast or speakers at a rock concert" bs you posted and the "10 times louder than speakers at rock concert" from the nist q&a session?

you mean the nist report that says..the structural integrity of the building was not a factor in the collapse..yet you claim it is every-time building 7 is mentioned ?...that nist report ?

Another of your ever growing list of lies. I neither mention 7's structural integrity in every post nor did I make a claim about it. I did question whether you were making that claim. I am not an engineer and, unlike all you CT "experts," I don't pretend to be.
Frankly, Princess, if I lied as regularly as you do I'd change my SN once a week because I'd be embarassed. You apparently have no shame or integrity.

truer words were never spoken.!

 

[SAYIT]

Oh STFU you whiny hypocritical asshole lying little bitch. You have no legs to stand on and no room to speak when it comes to substantiating any of your positions, and think you can escape from answering what is relevant to the thread by posting such BS..

Try as you may you can't save (ID)eots from himself and the damage his lying does to your "cause." Joining him down that road just adds to your own mendacious stench, Princess.

I misread a portion of the qoute..the as loud as a shot gun blast was accurate and what else that is compared to is not all that relevant anyway..but your claims are knowingly false..as loud as a Hiroshima nuke"..and repeating the old popular mechanics claims about how damage factored into the collapse long since rejected by NIst.

Misread? You earlier claimed to have posted the altered quote from memory. So which is it?
I was clearly speculating about how large a blast would have to be to have brought down 7 and you quoted the NIST as having said an explosion only as loud as the speakers at a rock concert when, in fact, they had actually said "10 times louder" than the speakers at a rock concert.
Give it up, Princess.
You lie because the truth just doesn't support your POV.
First rule of the hole: When in over your head, STOP DIGGING!

 

[eots]

sayit
and now you believe the nist report? I'm guessing it would have to have been a fucking large explosive (like a hiroshima nuke) and if that building was so structurally vunerable why do you doubt the rest of the nist report on 7's collapse?

liar..

 

[daws101]

sayit
and now you believe the nist report? I'm guessing it would have to have been a fucking large explosive (like a hiroshima nuke) and if that building was so structurally vunerable why do you doubt the rest of the nist report on 7's collapse?

liar..

another incisive retort from eots!

 

[Mr. Jones]

sayit
and now you believe the nist report? I'm guessing it would have to have been a fucking large explosive (like a hiroshima nuke) and if that building was so structurally vunerable why do you doubt the rest of the nist report on 7's collapse?

liar..

another incisive retort from eots!

Eots is correct Sayit is a liar, just like you are.
WTC 7 experienced the same molten steel and extreme temp phenomena, but had no plane inside of it, and was not covered in aluminum cladding.
The topic of the hread is the NIST report and you people have provided no plausible defense or reason for them to have ignored, and dismissed valuable evidence.
NIST says that one column's failure was all that was needed to fail the massive building, and produce FF for 8 stories and result in molten steel, and extreme temps....because of office fires.....
Just the fact that you people purposefully fail to acknowledge the many discrepancies in the theory of "collapse" of this building, and the other aspects of 9-11 is reason enough to
label you disinformation troll, and anti American, and anti truth.

The towers displayed explosions, squibs, and fell in extremely too fast of decent times, to not be the least bit curious and demand further scrutiny and details...

The NIST report is full of instances of deceitful tactics, the molten steel is just one, the explosions and squibs and ejections of tons of steel is another....You try to say these were air, but anyone with any sense can tell they occurred, waaay below the collapse fronts, and were too much in sync to be any pancaking floors..

So here we have 2 trolls, that have been caught in lies many times, hypocritically accusing another member of lying....Man you assholes have no shame, and only resort to this tactic because you have nothing to contribute to counter the accusations against NIST that have been presented...

 

[Mr. Jones]

I still don't know exactly what those molten mats were (they could have been aluminum) but given the likelihood that the fire was never hot enough to melt steel and the lack of evidence of any substance which could have melted steel and kept it molten for weeks leads me to conclude that your conclusions are just irrational, self-serving CT pap.

Why don't you know what "exactly" what they were? Because NIST failed to investigate or even concede that there were too numerous of sightings of it, including a WTC original engineer..These reports were numerous, and it would have been easy for the chief investigative agency to inquire about, and "test". Or they could have tried to use the aluminum
theory that you morons are doing here....But they didn't, because any molten metal reports weeks after the collapses, would point to another source, other then jet fuel fires in oxygen starved environments....

Nist failed on purpose on this instance, and they failed on the reports by eyewitnesses regarding the explosions as well.
You have failed to provide a rational argument that shows it is reasonable to declare and assume it was aluminum, and are failing to do the same regarding the explosions, squibs, and rapid collapse times, so you 2 resort to the fall back position of attacking the credibility of another poster who knows more then both of you combined about this topic.

So why don't you try to defend NIST on this other point regarding the explosions....

 

[daws101]

liar..

another incisive retort from eots!

Eots is correct Sayit is a liar, just like you are.
WTC 7 experienced the same molten steel and extreme temp phenomena, but had no plane inside of it, and was not covered in aluminum cladding.
The topic of the hread is the NIST report and you people have provided no plausible defense or reason for them to have ignored, and dismissed valuable evidence.
NIST says that one column's failure was all that was needed to fail the massive building, and produce FF for 8 stories and result in molten steel, and extreme temps....because of office fires.....
Just the fact that you people purposefully fail to acknowledge the many discrepancies in the theory of "collapse" of this building, and the other aspects of 9-11 is reason enough to
label you disinformation troll, and anti American, and anti truth.

The towers displayed explosions, squibs, and fell in extremely too fast of decent times, to not be the least bit curious and demand further scrutiny and details...

The NIST report is full of instances of deceitful tactics, the molten steel is just one, the explosions and squibs and ejections of tons of steel is another....You try to say these were air, but anyone with any sense can tell they occurred, waaay below the collapse fronts, and were too much in sync to be any pancaking floors..

So here we have 2 trolls, that have been caught in lies many times, hypocritically accusing another member of lying....Man you assholes have no shame, and only resort to this tactic because you have nothing to contribute to counter the accusations against NIST that have been presented...

as always talking a lot and not saying anything. please point where I've lied about anything . this should be good for a laugh or two..

 

[daws101]

Why don't you know what "exactly" what they were? Because NIST failed to investigate or even concede that there were too numerous of sightings of it, including a WTC original engineer..These reports were numerous, and it would have been easy for the chief investigative agency to inquire about, and "test". Or they could have tried to use the aluminum
theory that you morons are doing here....But they didn't, because any molten metal reports weeks after the collapses, would point to another source, other then jet fuel fires in oxygen starved environments....

Nist failed on purpose on this instance, and they failed on the reports by eyewitnesses regarding the explosions as well.
You have failed to provide a rational argument that shows it is reasonable to declare and assume it was aluminum, and are failing to do the same regarding the explosions, squibs, and rapid collapse times, so you 2 resort to the fall back position of attacking the credibility of another poster who knows more then both of you combined about this topic.

So why don't you try to defend NIST on this other point regarding the explosions....

hey shit head that's sayit's post not mine.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

wow,"7" farts in a row from you SAYIT. that must be a record for you.

 

[SAYIT]

liar..

another incisive retort from eots!

Eots is correct Sayit is a liar, just like you are....

Eots is spinning furiously because he's been caught in so many blatant lies and you are a fool.

 

[SAYIT]

Why don't you know what "exactly" what they were?....

Because I did no tests on the molten mats. Just because no one tested them is hardly reason to assume, without evidence of some secret super substance, that the mats were steel. Suppose the NIST had done tests and found no steel? You would simply claim they were lying.

 

[daws101]

another incisive retort from eots!

Eots is correct Sayit is a liar, just like you are....

Eots is spinning furiously because he's been caught in so many blatant lies and you are a fool.

he's no fool that would imply a kind of innocence ,instead of the huge ego he displays..

 

[SAYIT]

another incisive retort from eots!

Eots is correct Sayit is a liar, just like you are.
WTC 7 experienced the same molten steel and extreme temp phenomena, but had no plane inside of it, and was not covered in aluminum cladding.
The topic of the hread is the NIST report and you people have provided no plausible defense or reason for them to have ignored, and dismissed valuable evidence.
NIST says that one column's failure was all that was needed to fail the massive building, and produce FF for 8 stories and result in molten steel, and extreme temps....because of office fires.....
Just the fact that you people purposefully fail to acknowledge the many discrepancies in the theory of "collapse" of this building, and the other aspects of 9-11 is reason enough to
label you disinformation troll, and anti American, and anti truth.

The towers displayed explosions, squibs, and fell in extremely too fast of decent times, to not be the least bit curious and demand further scrutiny and details...

The NIST report is full of instances of deceitful tactics, the molten steel is just one, the explosions and squibs and ejections of tons of steel is another....You try to say these were air, but anyone with any sense can tell they occurred, waaay below the collapse fronts, and were too much in sync to be any pancaking floors..

So here we have 2 trolls, that have been caught in lies many times, hypocritically accusing another member of lying....Man you assholes have no shame, and only resort to this tactic because you have nothing to contribute to counter the accusations against NIST that have been presented...

as always talking a lot and not saying anything. please point where I've lied about anything . this should be good for a laugh or two..

I've seen this tactic before. When these nutters paint themselves into a corner with their lies they try to paint everyone else as the liar. Honesty is just not their strength. Lunacy is.

 

[SAYIT]

wow,"7" farts in a row from you SAYIT. that must be a record for you.

Every board needs a village idiot. Thanks to 9/11 Hand Job, Pauli and (ID)eots the CT Board has a few.

 

[daws101]

wow,"7" farts in a row from you SAYIT. that must be a record for you.

Every board needs a village idiot. Thanks to 9/11 Hand Job, Pauli and (ID)eots the CT Board has a few.

I wonder if they belong to the village idiots union. [ame=http://youtu.be/mlss_LiNeJk]Monty Python - Village Idiots - YouTube[/ame]