It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Proving Spontaneity of Post-Impact WTC Towers Collapse

page: 2
16
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 09:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: verschickter




How is a burning walmart -with a completly different roof structure- compareable to a building with 93 stories?

The floor structure (steel) is identical to the roof structure (steel) of all Walmart type structures.
Cheap floor trusses are identical to cheap roof trusses.

No fire department will enter a burning Walmart because they KNOW the roof WILL collapse at some point.
The floor trusses of WTC were the bracing for the inner and outer steel.
The outer steel could never support itself more than a few stories without bracing.
This is the flaw in the design of WTC.


You are the one who brought up Walmart, not I.

I've never seen a Walmart with 110 floors. You appear to be somewhat desperate here?




posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 02:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander




I've never seen a Walmart with 110 floors. You appear to be somewhat desperate here?

Not desperate at all.
All the floors on WTC used the same floor trusses.
Which are almost identical to the roof trusses at most Walmart type stores.
Take out the floor trusses and the exterior buckles.
Bend the floor trusses downward and the inner core gets twisted.

You know this but refuse to admit it because it messes with your conspiracy theory.



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: samkent


What I know is that the official story is pure bunkum. What I know is that some sort of controlled demolition was employed to take down the towers.



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 11:10 AM
link   
a reply to: verschickter

Truss structures are notorious for sudden collapse during fires

If one component of a truss fails that entire truss will be compromised

Truss construction uses smaller lighter pieces arranged in pattern give structural strength

The smaller pieces will heat up much faster than a single unitary piece of similar structural strength

Sometimes have only 10 minutes or less before the structure will collapse

Because of a number of structural collapses involving truss, killing many fire fighters, the local fire codes in NJ require
a building with truss construction to have a prominent sign in front indicting truss construction in floor or roof

old saying "Never trust s truss" will drilled into us at fire school....



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 01:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: samkent


What I know is that the official story is pure bunkum. What I know is that some sort of controlled demolition was employed to take down the towers.


How times have you been ask to list the top five items of pure bunk with evidence to prove your point? Always to have the question ignored.



posted on Dec, 9 2017 @ 09:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: UnderKingsPeak

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: UnderKingsPeak




How does an office fire 93 stories up cause a spontaneous collapse of all 110 stories in 10-11 sec ?

Only people without degrees talk like this.
You have only to ask your local fire department why they won't enter a burning Walmart and you will have your answer.


People with degrees think kerosene and paper
can destroy 90+ floors of steel concrete gypsum and glass
in 10 seconds ?


No, they don’t.

They know that office fires can weaken steel to cause it to collapse.

They also know that once a collapse has begun it more than likely will continue to total failure due to gravity unless extraordinary engineering measures were taken during the design to arrest any such total failures.

Only the ignorant state that office fires destroyed 110 floors.



posted on Dec, 9 2017 @ 10:20 AM
link   
I'm a commercial construction project manager.
I've been involved in building 5 high rises and am managing two projects now at 26 and 40 floors.
I have over 30 years experience building high rises with a bachelors in construction management and deal with structural engineers all the time.
But this matters not as people with zero experience in this actually know way more than we do.



posted on Dec, 9 2017 @ 10:33 AM
link   

a reply to: samkent

You have only to ask your local fire department why they won't enter a burning Walmart and you will have your answer.


ironic considering how many firefighters entered the WTC



posted on Dec, 9 2017 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: AttitudeProblem

Vast difference between local Walmart and 110 story building

FF apparently did not know of the web truss floor construction

Aircraft impacts knocked much of the fireproofing off the structural steel exposing it to the fires

Not stuff you normally encounter



posted on Dec, 11 2017 @ 05:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: MrBig2430

originally posted by: UnderKingsPeak

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: UnderKingsPeak




How does an office fire 93 stories up cause a spontaneous collapse of all 110 stories in 10-11 sec ?

Only people without degrees talk like this.
You have only to ask your local fire department why they won't enter a burning Walmart and you will have your answer.


People with degrees think kerosene and paper
can destroy 90+ floors of steel concrete gypsum and glass
in 10 seconds ?


No, they don’t.

They know that office fires can weaken steel to cause it to collapse.

They also know that once a collapse has begun it more than likely will continue to total failure due to gravity unless extraordinary engineering measures were taken during the design to arrest any such total failures.

Only the ignorant state that office fires destroyed 110 floors.


Finally we agree. Yes, only the ignorant state that office fires destroyed 110 floors, yet that is precisely what NIST wants us to believe. Not only ignorant, NIST is simply a political organization attempting to (in this case) protect the guilty parties and suppress the truth.



posted on Dec, 11 2017 @ 05:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander



Finally we agree. Yes, only the ignorant state that office fires destroyed 110 floors, yet that is precisely what NIST wants us to believe. Not only ignorant, NIST is simply a political organization attempting to (in this case) protect the guilty parties and suppress the truth.


Heard the same thing from FDNY incident commanders at a seminar 6 months after 9/11

Are you calling the FDNY chiefs "ignorant"

only one ignorant is you.......



posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 02:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: MrBig2430

originally posted by: UnderKingsPeak

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: UnderKingsPeak




How does an office fire 93 stories up cause a spontaneous collapse of all 110 stories in 10-11 sec ?

Only people without degrees talk like this.
You have only to ask your local fire department why they won't enter a burning Walmart and you will have your answer.


People with degrees think kerosene and paper
can destroy 90+ floors of steel concrete gypsum and glass
in 10 seconds ?


No, they don’t.

They know that office fires can weaken steel to cause it to collapse.

They also know that once a collapse has begun it more than likely will continue to total failure due to gravity unless extraordinary engineering measures were taken during the design to arrest any such total failures.

Only the ignorant state that office fires destroyed 110 floors.


Finally we agree. Yes, only the ignorant state that office fires destroyed 110 floors, yet that is precisely what NIST wants us to believe.


I really have no idea why anyone would respond seriously to your lies.

Better to point out that this nothing more than trolling and not an attempt at serious debate nor an attempt to deny ignorance.



posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: MrBig2430

You said it sir. I agreed that only the ignorant (or politically compromised) would claim in public that office fires (and gravity) destroyed 110 floors, but that is exactly what NIST claimed.

Are you trying to walk that statement back?



posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 05:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: MrBig2430

You said it sir. I agreed that only the ignorant (or politically compromised) would claim in public that office fires (and gravity) destroyed 110 floors, but that is exactly what NIST claimed.

Are you trying to walk that statement back?



Funny you ignore the fires in the context the jet impacts reduced the number of vertical and core columns supporting the load, jet impacts removed fire protection required by code, the WTC used less concrete beyond normal practice to save cost, and the WTC did not have traditional concrete cores that saved other building in the past. Concrete cores that still would have been damaged by the jet impacts.

Do you only have false and misleading arguments.



posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 05:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

And it would be more accurate to say that NIST said fire was in a chain of issues that lead to mechanical failure leading to collapse.

I guess you don’t like truthfully arguments. Why you have no credible arguments.



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 07:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: MrBig2430

You said it sir. I agreed that only the ignorant (or politically compromised) would claim in public that office fires (and gravity) destroyed 110 floors, but that is exactly what NIST claimed.

Are you trying to walk that statement back?



Ah. So now you’ve changed your question to include gravity.

Kinda important to include that.

And yes, plane impacts, fires, and gravitational potential destroyed the towers.

It’s proven.

Get over it.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 07:32 AM
link   
a reply to: MrBig2430


Gravity exists separate from my personal existence or discussion of it. Gravity is a fact of life, a constant. I'm glad you approve of my mentioning it.

When you say "it's proven", to what are you referring? What is proven?

What has been proven is that the official NIST explanation is false. It is an assertion by political creatures from the bully pulpit, and that assertion fails in scientific analysis. That's why 2000+ architects and engineers have dissented from the nonsensical claim by NIST.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 08:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: MrBig2430


Gravity exists separate from my personal existence or discussion of it. Gravity is a fact of life, a constant. I'm glad you approve of my mentioning it.

When you say "it's proven", to what are you referring? What is proven?

What has been proven is that the official NIST explanation is false. It is an assertion by political creatures from the bully pulpit, and that assertion fails in scientific analysis. That's why 2000+ architects and engineers have dissented from the nonsensical claim by NIST.


Again, list what you think are the 5 biggest NIST lies with counter arguments.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 08:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Proven by what peer reviewed research? Or even by what published paper or document?



posted on Dec, 16 2017 @ 07:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: MrBig2430

When you say "it's proven", to what are you referring? What is proven?




That plane impacts, fire, and gravity destroyed the towers.

Or have you forgotten?

Like I said, it’s proven.

No deranged belief in nuclear weapons being the cause trumps that. Unless one is truly retarded.




top topics



 
16
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join