Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So, you say that the temps from the combustible materials inside the building were hot enough to cause this expansion and in such uniformity, that the building collapsed in a straight down symmetrical fashion?
*sigh*
As has already been explained to you numerous times, components in a building design are calculated to work TOGETHER to support loads. When you start to fail components such as connections that were sheared due to thermal expansion, you start to take away from the design as a whole. When components start to fail, the load they helped support must be transfered elsewhere and thus put additional load on the remaining structure. That structure can only handle a certain amount until it fails completely.
You keep using the term symmetrical. That collapse was FAR from symmetrical as the east penthouse collapse followed by the west side. THEN the perimeter collapsed.
Let's discuss something. When the east penthouse collapsed and then the west side, what was left?
Here is the unedited collapse of the WTC 7 building..do you see the big main part of the building, AKA as the ENTIRE BUILDING collapsing in a straight down manner that produced 2.25 seconds of freefall?
http://www.usmessageboard.com/consp...of-the-wtc-7-collapse-with-the-penthouse.html
You are doing mental gymnastics to overlook this fact...all the BS about one particular support beam or trusses you say actually caused this? With only sporadic office fires, and it didn't show signs of deformation that sporadic fires and temps, in a few areas of the building had?
NISTs explanation is crazy, we would expect to see some partial collapsing and deformation..but in all 3 buildings we witnessed straight down global collapses. NIST theory and your adherence to it is absolutely fucking nuts.
Chandler said: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.
The other 2 people would not automatically collapse to the fucking ground you dumbass! They would resist doing so if even for a little while! Perhaps an individual on one side or the other would give out first, and the pipe would tilt in that direction. You make too easy!If you have three people sharing the load of a steel pipe and the middle person drops out, do the people on either end now evenly take up the load that the middle person was handling or is it transfered to only one end?
You are saying that the entire steel beams in question in the WTC buildings got hot enough to expand, when it has been shown that there were only sporadic fires of less intensity to cause this. Am I wrong? Prove it then.
And for you to assume that a mere 1" of expansion will cause the straight down collapse of 3 buildings is just plain fucking lunacyWhy didn't it collapse in a manner more consistent with the damage caused by the sporadic and highly displaced fires, in other word..some partial collapse?
You do realize that heating steel in one spot does not mean the entire length of that beam is going to be the same temp along its entire length don't you?
Then we would expect to see the part of the building that fails, deform, or give way FIRST, while dragging the other part of it with it, this would not happen all at once dipshit,Do you understand structural design? All components work together to support a load. If you start failing individual components, then the remaining components have to take over that part of the load. I gave you a simple example before, but you ignored it.
We did see that you fucking moron!!!!!
THE MECHANICAL PENTHOUSE COLLAPSED FIRST!!!!!
and there would be and obvious delay as the stable part of the building would resist...
And there you have it folks. Complete idiocy. Did Mr. Jones just describe the video posted? Part of the building collapsed (PENTHOUSE)...delay...perimeter columns....
The other 2 people would not automatically collapse to the fucking ground you dumbass! They would resist doing so if even for a little while! Perhaps an individual on one side or the other would give out first, and the pipe would tilt in that direction. You make too easy!If you have three people sharing the load of a steel pipe and the middle person drops out, do the people on either end now evenly take up the load that the middle person was handling or is it transfered to only one end?
The 3 buildings came straight fucking down as though all the support beams lost their integrity at the same fucking time!!
That is why people with common sense and knowledge started to question the whole collapse scenario.
And again Alzheimer Ollie forgets to watch the video of the CD expert in which he clearly mentions that thermitic cutter charges would not make the very loud explosions, like the ones in your posted videos, and he also mention that it certainly could have been done with remote detonators.
The videos you post are videos of what one would see and hear in a CD that was not a covert clandestine operation, that was made to look like 2 planes were the cause of the buildings demise you stupid jerk.
Can your expert explain to us how these charges were protected from the Aircraft so that they wouldn't ignite before they were supposed to? Can he even explain how they were installed so that they would remain in place when that fully loaded aircraft smashed into the building? Maybe he can explain how the demo crew got into the building and placed all these charges without anyone seeing them or getting suspicious? Maybe he can then tell us why he no longer works for CDI? Sorry but your version never happened.
Your argument comes from the point of view that if no one can show you the exact plan, or det cord etc.. then the WHOLE alternative hypothesis is flawed, which is another fallacy you boneheads use..it's so obvious.
One need not show you the precise plan and execution of it, or hand you the conspirators confession on a silver platter..there are many things that no one can explain without a real non bias new investigation.
The WTC buildings did not collapse and pulverize the way they said it did, many credible experts back this up.
In other words just because we don't know the exact people involved, or when the cutting charges were placed, or by what crew, doesn't mean that the buildings were NOT destroyed in a manner other then what has been told to us.
AKA as the ENTIRE BUILDING collapsing in a straight down manner that produced 2.25 seconds of freefall?
If anybody wanted to know the truth about 9/11/2001, all one has to do is research the opinions of the many credible experts, especially those who don't have to rely on government contracts or funding, and aren't afraid to speak truth to power. "troofers"--and you actually came on here to post that those with the alternative hypothesis to the attack on 9-11, are "dweebs" for calling you assholes OCTAss or debunkersFYI:
If anybody wanted to know the truth about 9/11/2001, the last person he'd speak with is a fucking scumbag 9/11 Troofer. 9/11 Troofers are incapable of honesty. Fucking scumbags that they are.
You are a hypocritical scumbag of the highest order, and I say that with all due respect to you also, which obviously is absolutely none.
amen to that.If anybody wanted to know the truth about 9/11/2001, all one has to do is research the opinions of the many credible experts, especially those who don't have to rely on government contracts or funding, and aren't afraid to speak truth to power. "troofers"--and you actually came on here to post that those with the alternative hypothesis to the attack on 9-11, are "dweebs" for calling you assholes OCTAss or debunkersFYI:
If anybody wanted to know the truth about 9/11/2001, the last person he'd speak with is a fucking scumbag 9/11 Troofer. 9/11 Troofers are incapable of honesty. Fucking scumbags that they are.
You are a hypocritical scumbag of the highest order, and I say that with all due respect to you also, which obviously is absolutely none.
If anybody wanted to know the truth about 9/11/2001, all one has to do is research the opinions of the many credible experts, especially those who don't have to rely on government contracts or funding, and aren't afraid to speak truth to power. "troofers"--and you actually came on here to post that those with the alternative hypothesis to the attack on 9-11, are "dweebs" for calling you assholes OCTAss or debunkersFYI:
If anybody wanted to know the truth about 9/11/2001, the last person he'd speak with is a fucking scumbag 9/11 Troofer. 9/11 Troofers are incapable of honesty. Fucking scumbags that they are.
You are a hypocritical scumbag of the highest order, and I say that with all due respect to you also, which obviously is absolutely none.
Except you fuckwads never cite to credible experts. You are far too dishonest and stupid. You understand nothing of math or science. You are deliberately distorted. You pussies are all filthy vermin.
Eat shit, you lying cock-scraper. Clean the foreskin scrapings off your teeth.
All troofers are lying stupid scumbags. You pose a danger to yourself and others. You should be monitored.
You are saying that the entire steel beams in question in the WTC buildings got hot enough to expand, when it has been shown that there were only sporadic fires of less intensity to cause this. Am I wrong? Prove it then.
And for you to assume that a mere 1" of expansion will cause the straight down collapse of 3 buildings is just plain fucking lunacy
Why didn't it collapse in a manner more consistent with the damage caused by the sporadic and highly displaced fires, in other word..some partial collapse?
You do realize that heating steel in one spot does not mean the entire length of that beam is going to be the same temp along its entire length don't you?
demolition expert???
Are you high again? He was a staff photographer and someone who handled explosives and placed them? Are you telling me that a welder is an expert in structural design and can speak on that subject with authority?
You're a dumbass.
well, he may be an expert when compared to the common twoofer; in the land of blind men; the man with one eye is the king.
wtf do you know troll
If anybody wanted to know the truth about 9/11/2001, all one has to do is research the opinions of the many credible experts, especially those who don't have to rely on government contracts or funding, and aren't afraid to speak truth to power. "troofers"--and you actually came on here to post that those with the alternative hypothesis to the attack on 9-11, are "dweebs" for calling you assholes OCTAss or debunkers
You are a hypocritical scumbag of the highest order, and I say that with all due respect to you also, which obviously is absolutely none.
Except you fuckwads never cite to credible experts. You are far too dishonest and stupid. You understand nothing of math or science. You are deliberately distorted. You pussies are all filthy vermin.
Eat shit, you lying cock-scraper. Clean the foreskin scrapings off your teeth.
All troofers are lying stupid scumbags. You pose a danger to yourself and others. You should be monitored.
why do you lie and spew obscenities are you mental ?
The other 2 people would not automatically collapse to the fucking ground you dumbass! They would resist doing so if even for a little while! Perhaps an individual on one side or the other would give out first, and the pipe would tilt in that direction. You make too easy!If you have three people sharing the load of a steel pipe and the middle person drops out, do the people on either end now evenly take up the load that the middle person was handling or is it transfered to only one end?
The 3 buildings came straight fucking down as though all the support beams lost their integrity at the same fucking time!!
That is why people with common sense and knowledge started to question the whole collapse scenario.
You dumbass!
Not if the load was too great for two people to handle!!!
What a dipshit. I guess, based on your logic, that being a welder makes you an expert in structural design.
And for you to assume that a mere 1" of expansion will cause the straight down collapse of 3 buildings is just plain fucking lunacy
*sigh*
You're just too stupid to even BEGIN to understand. If a steel column expands, it will shear the bolted connections thus rendering the structure weaker as a whole. This didn't happen in one spot you fucking imbecile. Not to mention that the heat WEAKENS, not MELTS, steel components. If you put a load on a steel beam, and apply heat, it starts to lose it's ability to support that load. As the temperature climbs, the weaker it gets. You idiots can't seem to grasp that. o talk to a structural engineer and ask about it.
Why didn't it collapse in a manner more consistent with the damage caused by the sporadic and highly displaced fires, in other word..some partial collapse?
The over stressed components could fail, dragging the still rigid part of the building with it, causing a deformation, and initial partial collapse, we saw non of that, just a straight down collapse of 3 buildings, in seconds, remember these were sporadic and displaced fires you claim did this damage, therefore we should have seen the end result be sporadic deformations, and partial displaced collapses,Because the the load supported by the weakened/damaged components gets transfered to the remaining, still intact components as a whole. When the core columns collapsed in WTC7 the 58 perimeter columns were left with trying to hold up not only themselves, but the reaming floors, trusses, and girders that remained attached to the perimeter columns. The perimeter columns were designed to HELP the center columns with the support of the floors and everything else. Eventually the load became to0 much for the 58 perimeter columns to support and came down as a whole.
You do realize that heating steel in one spot does not mean the entire length of that beam is going to be the same temp along its entire length don't you?
And you are comparing expansion of piping to the massive columns of the WTC?Come on Mr. Jones. Are you really that stupid? Are you telling me that an office fire in several rooms doesn't heat up the ENTIRE room or area (including the steel columns and truuses, etc.)? Are you comparing a localized welding torch applied to a piece of steel to an office fire as far as how the heat is distributed/contained?
That block was pulverized, basically disappearing, what caused that? Here's a 3 part video that can better debunk the smaller block crushing the larger stable lower block.As far as the twin towers were concerned, you didn't only have fire that made the towers collapse. You started the sequence with damage from the jet. First you severed perimeter columns on one side that helped distribute the load of the upper portion of the tower. Then you have damaged/severed core columns. Taking out these two components made the remaining components have to take up the load slack that the damaged/severed components once helped with. (hence the pipe and three people example). Then the office fires started which began to weaken (not melt) the remaining support components (core columns, floor trusses, etc.) when you start to weaken already over-stressed components, what do you think happens?
The next stage of the collapse is the upper \"block" coming down. That upper block hits the first floor below the failed components. What do you think failed? That block completely destroyed any floor connections on that next floor. Without anything holding the perimeter columns to the core columns, the block kept going to the next floor.
You are saying that the entire steel beams in question in the WTC buildings got hot enough to expand, when it has been shown that there were only sporadic fires of less intensity to cause this. Am I wrong? Prove it then.
Come on Mr. Jones.
Please post the link that proves there is a temperature in which steel starts to thermally expand. You made the claim. I'm challenging you to show me the validity of it.
You are saying that the entire steel beams in question in the WTC buildings got hot enough to expand, when it has been shown that there were only sporadic fires of less intensity to cause this. Am I wrong? Prove it then.
Come on Mr. Jones.
Please post the link that proves there is a temperature in which steel starts to thermally expand. You made the claim. I'm challenging you to show me the validity of it.
Read the part you emboldened again...I am asking YOU to prove this if you deny it, quit trying to say I'm making a claim I am clearly not.
you still haven't responded to the fire in 1975, where the wtc didn't collapse. The february 13, 1975 wtc1 north tower fire. The 1975 fire was more intense than the 9-11 fires is evident from the fact that it caused the 11th floor east side windows to break and flames could be seen pouring from these broken windows. This indicates a temperature greater than 700°c. In the 9-11 fires the windows were not broken by the heat (only by the aircraft impact) indicating a temperature below 700°c.
