Architect Richard Gage on C-Span

a reply to: wmd_2008

CAN I understand why the towers collapsed YES

oh please tell me....

I have spent many years in construction all over New England, I more than welcome your pointless banter.


what is the 'crush down' mechanism within the core????

no floors above to collapse anything.....continuous load bearing vertical support from the hat truss all the way to the bedrock....no floors in between these columns...
elevators, stairways and landings ALL go in between these columns laced with cross, lateral and diagonal bracing.


second impact all but missed the core...we see this....so did 2005 NIST.

so the 2008 NIST has collapse models showing NEW science did all this they refuse to release outside for peer review of the data variables that TELL the models what to do, HOW to behave.

new science they refuse to prove through science......NO one else holds or authors the official claims pushed.

NIST is the only ones whom can prove them...and they refuse......go figure.

a reply to: biffcartright

Best and simplest method to show you what happened to the core?

Take a whole handful of soda straws. Like a whole bunch. Hold them up straight in a circle with your hand. Then take a baseball and put it on top of the straws and push down. You get the idea.

originally posted by: biffcartright
a reply to: wmd_2008

CAN I understand why the towers collapsed YES

oh please tell me....

I have spent many years in construction all over New England, I more than welcome your pointless banter.


what is the 'crush down' mechanism within the core????

no floors above to collapse anything.....continuous load bearing vertical support from the hat truss all the way to the bedrock....no floors in between these columns...
elevators, stairways and landings ALL go in between these columns laced with cross, lateral and diagonal bracing.


.

Like I said YOU don't have the ability to understand what happened that's the problem, like I said I SHOW people like you on sites what to do and what to use you should really just stick to that!!!

YOU don't understand the loading in the structure, YOU don't understand the DYNAMIC load generated on the structure below when the upper floors collapsed, YOU don't understand when the actual collapse of WTC 7 really started, YOU don't even have the smarts to change your rhetoric when you rejoin after a ban.

How does that sound to YA!!!

a reply to: biffcartright

Also forgot to mention, the top section that came down for both Towers was set off center. It did not hall perfectly down, but off. South Tower tilted over greatly before it fell. That would have caused immense damage to the core. But some sections of the core survived, until they too fell over. North Tower had a larger chunk of the core standing due to the higher initiation of the collapse, but there too, the top was just a little off center and it plunged through, roof and all the floors down, through the structure.

a reply to: biffcartright

what is the 'crush down' mechanism within the core????

You don't need a crush down mech.
Just torque in a non vertical direction.
Once the upper floors start moving downward nothing below was strong enough to stop them.

a reply to: GenRadek

Then take a baseball and put it on top of the straws and push down.

now, tell me WHERE in the towers this..EXTRA pushing occurs????

and since we are talking LIKE objects, instead of straws, use the equivalent of base ball bats and then take your bat and push down on them......

...you get the idea!

a reply to: samkent

You don't need a crush down mech.
Just torque in a non vertical direction.

there is NO torque until AFTER the columns fail.......again, putting the cart before the horse.

and for every one direction of pull, there are MULTIPLE directions resisting that pull......oh the wonders of redundancy within a steel frame!

a reply to: wmd_2008

Like I said YOU don't have the ability to understand what happened

more like you are caught in a lie.

YOU don't understand the loading in the structure, YOU don't understand the DYNAMIC load generated on the structure below when the upper floors collapsed, YOU don't understand when the actual collapse of WTC 7 really started,

sure I do, I saw the 2008 NIST webcast when they officially claimed a new before seen physics phenomenon fell 7.

I post that here but for some reason, you ignore it.....wonder why.

a reply to: GenRadek

Also forgot to mention, the top section that came down for both Towers was set off center.

and how does that symmetrically crush ALL below according to Bazzant's 'top block' theory?????

how does that top block remain perfectly centered making ALL lower 286 columns offer the SAME amount of resistance.....to perfectly keep it from falling off?..x2

oh yea....a new physics phenomenon!!!!

...right.

a reply to: biffcartright

how does that top block remain perfectly centered

Because there was no force pushing the top off center.

a reply to: samkent

Because there was no force pushing the top off center.

sure there is...the difference being EVERY load bearing columns that is NOT involved with fire between those that are.....

the symmetry shows they offer the SAME resistance...now how is that possible for symmetry to occur within a chaotic uncontrolled collapse........x3?

originally posted by: biffcartright
a reply to: samkent

Because there was no force pushing the top off center.

sure there is...the difference being EVERY load bearing columns that is NOT involved with fire between those that are.....

the symmetry shows they offer the SAME resistance...now how is that possible for symmetry to occur within a chaotic uncontrolled collapse........x3?

Symmetry REALLY

South Tower Collapse



Want to show me how that is symmetry , how its the same as the North Tower Collapse you do know that even WTC 7 DIDN'T fall straight down like you think.

If you look at the rubble pile of WTC7 the NORTH Elevation fell on top of the South Elevation can YOU with your supposed building experience work out why that happened.

The South Tower hit off center lower down fell FIRST larger load above impact point!

The North Tower hit almost mid elevation higher up fell almost straight and although hit first because of the lower load above impact point it fell second!

The damage the towers sustained is in relation to the orientation of the cores in relation to the aircraft impacts.

WTC7 South elevation damaged/South West Corner damaged so NORTH elevation fell over that as seen in the rubble pile.

Go have a look for yourself

a reply to: wmd_2008

Symmetry REALLY

South Tower Collapse

really!!!...You can see from the videos that the collapses were symmetrical, it's ridiculous to argue they weren't..

KNOWN physics that tells us objects always fall to the path of least resistance. Using this common knowledge it's not hard to surmise that a symmetrical collapse is not possible unless controlled....

now how does that tipping top, MAGICALLY stay centered ALL THE WAY DOWN to the bottom as the Bazzant theory states.....

WE SEE that upper mass shifted 22 degrees off center...HOW can it possibly impart an EQUAL force on the opposite side of the building when ALL it's momentum force is toppling over to ONE side?

as we see it did, against ALL known physics.....no matter how long they took, we see they were one smooth collapse wave. There was no stopping and starting of the collapses through laws of mechanics, conservation of momentum, transference of energy, Newtons 2nd, 3rd. law, known structural failure behavior.....once initiated we see the collapses were non-stop, symmetrical, and complete.

WTC 7 DIDN'T fall straight down like you think.

during the GLOBAL UNIFIED interval of acceleration it DID.....the 2005 NIST saw it also and reported it.....they made an ENTIRE section of it....

NICSTAR 1A 4.3.4] Global Collapse..."The entire building above the buckled column region moved downward in a single unit, as observed, completing the global collapse"

do you understand what "ENTIRE"building means?????....the word, "GLOBAL"?......the term, 'single-unit'.....I suggest learning what these words mean BEFORE your fingers run-a-muck here posting things your brain can't respond to.

a reply to: biffcartright

really!!!...You can see from the videos that the collapses were symmetrical, it's ridiculous to argue they weren't..

emmmm so according to you then this:



is symmetry?

I think it is ridiculous for you to try to argue that the collapse was symmetrical, its a classic case of pareidolia, or seeing what you want to see because it fit in with your preconceived ideas of what happened.

Again it all comes back to this truther psychology we have discussed before. Weather or not the collapse was symmetrical does not really matter either way but truthers have been giving this false belief that a controlled demolition has to be symmetrical (it does not). As such they try to argue that the collapses where symmetrical because they have this bizarre notion that it some how supports the CD theory. It fits into their "Chain of conspiracy" that I talk about quite a lot, the idea of a symmetrical collapse is another link in the chain, just like "they fell into their own foot print...mostly" is another link in the chain that makes up the wider 9/11 conspiracy. As more and more of these links become broken, ie, it was not a symmetrical collapse. The whole chain that forms the wider 9/11 becomes weaker and Mr. Truther cannot have that so even though the idea of a symmetrical collapse can be debunked with one picture, you continue to deny it though the eyes of pareidolia.

You are not interested in truth, you are interested in preserving the grandiose conspiracy.

This is not how you deny ignorance.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

emmmm so according to you then this:




is symmetry?

again, if there was NOT symmetry, we would NOT be discussing the TOTAL global collapse of three buildings..

and why do you avoid telling me HOW does that 'tipping top' imparts the SAME EQUAL force on the opposite side, as it must, with ALL that momentum going in the opposite direction....????

..new physics??????

Truther cannot have that so even though the idea of a symmetrical collapse can be debunked with one picture

a pic that looks like that top is gonna fall off the structure is your idea for support for not being 'symmetrical'.....what SHOWS the symmetry is the ENTIRE building is GONE!!!