University of Alaska Fairbanks Professor Launches New 9/11 Research Project

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: humanityrising

It's a talking point many like to use...9-11 truthers are somehow in the same camp as moon hoaxers, reptilians, etc. Nope; that's what separates 911- there are enough genuinely captivating anomalies in the OS to at the very least strike curiosity. It's not like you're instantly crazy for even pondering it. It's one of those things that, regardless of the position you take on it, you probably came to that conclusion by actually doing a bit of research, not just taking someone's word for it.

Questioning aspects of 9/11 is not the problem - it is the bizarre conspiracies (space beams, nuclear bombs, etc) which are
bandied about. Even the nano thermite/secret explosives in building theories fail the logic test .

One has to stay within the bounds of reality....

You can question such things as why Port Authority used unproven materials and methods in building like WTC

Things like why used bar joist web truss for floor supports rather than solid I Beams or using untested spray on fire proofing
(and then guessing how much to use 1/2 in initially, later increased to 1 1/2 inches)

I'm not saying you are wrong but why would you say the thermite theory fails the logic test? In your own words I mean? (I'm not trying to engage you in debate here I'm asking out of curiosity)

Double post

a reply to: samkent

But that's not what the OS says brought the buildings down, now is it?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Doctor Smith

Sorry, but a chair is soild. Does not copmress like a building. The leg is at the perimeter and not a core internal failure. In fact, only takes thtee points to make a plain. Remove one leg of four, the chair may stay upright. Poor choice. What are you? The doctor of illogic?

Sounds like you needed to be held back at the third grade until your comprehension reading improved.

originally posted by: humanityrising
a reply to: samkent

Neutronflux somehow sees relevance in two walkways that collapsed in 1981 due to 'insufficient load capacity'. A bit of the pot calling the kettle black no doubt.

Exactly. If that's the best they can do. Their best won't do.

Hardly a global collapse of a steel frame sky scraper. Anything to believe in their Easter Bunny Santa Clause government. LOL

a reply to: Doctor Smith

Really???? All you have is a chair comparison? At least I know three points define a geometric plain and three legged chairs and tables exist. Or do you want to debate their existence too. Guess you are not a doctor of geometry. Your agreement is only demolishions can cause structures to pancake into there own footprints. (Hate to bring up facts, but the WTC builds did not fall into there own footprints. They created large ruble piles. Their collapse looks more like a flow of volcanic ash. I guess you see what you want to see). I clearly gave exaples that you are wrong. Earth quakes cause structures to pankcake into there own footprints. Buildings, bridges, and highway on / off ramps. Sorry you are to lazy or brainwashed to do the research. Bottom line, other failure modes than demolitions have cause numerous buildings and structures to be destroyed through pancking into their own footprints. So Smith you are flat wrong that demolishions are the only thing that cause structures to pancake.

a reply to: Doctor Smith

Really???? All you have is a chair comparison? At least I know three points define a geometric plain and three legged chairs and tables exist. Or do you want to debate their existence too. Guess you are not a doctor of geometry. Your agreement is only demolishions can cause structures to pancake into there own footprints. (Hate to bring up facts, but the WTC builds did not fall into there own footprints. They created large ruble piles. Their collapse looks more like a flow of volcanic ash. I guess you see what you want to see). I clearly gave exaples that you are wrong. Earth quakes cause structures to pankcake into there own footprints. Buildings, bridges, and highway on / off ramps. Sorry you are to lazy or brainwashed to do the research. Bottom line, other failure modes than demolitions have cause numerous buildings and structures to be destroyed through pancking into their own footprints. So Smith you are flat wrong that demolishions are the only thing that cause structures to pancake.

a reply to: Doctor Smith

You cannot even get the type of buildings right. The WTC buildings were steel framed buildings on reinforced concrete foundations and walls. If you every tried to use concrete as firebrick, it don't work.

examples of progressive collapse (pancake)

a reply to: Doctor Smith

And the haytte was an real exapmle of a failure of a steel and concrete structure. How does the tragic event make me believe in Santa Claus? Your the one that believes made up physicas where structural steel does not loses its ability to resist stress as it heats up and becomes bendable. You don't melt a steel blank to just create a horse shoe? You bend and shape heated steel.

The temperatures don't get that hot in office fires. Any idiot knows that steel will melt at some point. Stop the cheap shots.

Here's a few more examples of more buildings similar to building 7 on fire.

Can't find buildings similar collapsing? Gee I wonder why? Perhaps you're wrong?

a reply to: Doctor Smith

Watch this and go away!

m.youtube.com...

Nobody is saying the fires fueled by jet fuel melted steel. Impact of the jets removed protective insulation from the steel supports. (Wtc 7 was storing fuel for its generators.) Steel loses its ability to maintain its form when heated. The fires were hot enough the steel bent under the stain of static load. One floor gives, causing a shock load on the next floor under it. That starts a chain reaction of gailures and leads to pancaking.

a reply to: Doctor Smith

And for the thousand time, lots of building with no inital damage or fires have panckaed during earthquakes. Here some examples of spontaneous building collapses. Yes there are examples of pancaking with no external forces.

www.bestonlineengineeringdegree.com...

a reply to: sg1642

I'm not saying you are wrong but why would you say the thermite theory fails the logic test? In your own words I mean? (I'm not trying to engage you in debate here I'm asking out of curiosity)

Explain on how one

1) smuggles in massive quantities of thermite without anyone noticing

2) cut open walls to expose underlying steel without creating massive amounts of noise/dust/debris again without noticing

3) assemble sufficient people without anyone noticing

Thermite would create massive amounts of slag

a reply to: firerescue

Explain on how one

1) smuggles in massive quantities of thermite without anyone noticing

2) cut open walls to expose underlying steel without creating massive amounts of noise/dust/debris again without noticing

3) assemble sufficient people without anyone noticing

Simple, because every bodies in on it.
Isn't that how conspiracies work ?

a reply to: Doctor Smith

Can't find buildings similar collapsing? Gee I wonder why? Perhaps you're wrong?

Can you show us any other buildings where:
1. The majority of their center mass were supported at the edges through engineering trusses.
2. Said building had steel and debris rained down from hundreds of feet.
3. Had totally unfought fires for 6+ hours.

Gee I wonder why? Perhaps your theory is wrong.

a reply to: firerescue

The mysterious ACE Elevator Company covers all of these points.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Doctor Smith

Watch this and go away!

m.youtube.com...

Nobody is saying the fires fueled by jet fuel melted steel. Impact of the jets removed protective insulation from the steel supports. (Wtc 7 was storing fuel for its generators.) Steel loses its ability to maintain its form when heated. The fires were hot enough the steel bent under the stain of static load. One floor gives, causing a shock load on the next floor under it. That starts a chain reaction of gailures and leads to pancaking.

Nobody is saying you can't weaken steel by heating it red hot. I hope you realize all the steel support would have to be gone at the same time. For a global foot print collapse to occur. And at free fall speed.

Still no examples of that happening. You have failed. But at least you tried.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Doctor Smith

And for the thousand time, lots of building with no inital damage or fires have panckaed during earthquakes. Here some examples of spontaneous building collapses. Yes there are examples of pancaking with no external forces.

www.bestonlineengineeringdegree.com...

And for the millionth time. The only examples of global collapse in your link was buildings 1 and 2 twin towers. Don't bother me again until you figure out what a global collapse of a steel frame sky scraper is. You might be able to get away with this BS with somebody else but don't try it on me.

a reply to: sg1642

The listed building exaples had two or three cases were builds fell soley due to structural failure. No fires no earthquakes. So doc, you are saying it was impossible the twin towers fell because they were hit by jets causing internal damage, introducing flaws, and removed the insulation protecting the steel. The jet fuel ignited causing fires that resulted in the the steel to lose its resistance to strain. It was impossible building seven to collapse because it was hit by falling debries that may have removed up to twenty percent of its structure in addition to the fuel form its generators burning out of controlled. Do you even stop to listen to yourself.

You said there was no examples! There are examples by your own admition. If a match and a stove gas leak can cause a quarter of a building to collapse in UK, what do you think a jet slaming into a tower and exploding will cause. If a builing can solely fail spontaiously, yet its still imposdible a builing fell becsuse it was hit with the amount of energy equivalent of 600 tons of tnt. Again, do you even stop to listen to yourself?