posted on Apr, 20 2018 @ 09:07 PM
a reply to: kyleplatinum
One, what does this have to do with no evidence of devices releasing enough energy with enough consistency to cut steel columns in a sophisticated
floor to floor CD.
Two, the mass of a building does not create work. Think of the columns of a building as a trigger on a crossbow, and gravity the bowstring. Once a
column buckles, it provides essential no resistance. This triggers the conversation of potential energy to kinetic energy. Changing a static load to
a dynamic load. Converting potential energy to kinetic energy by the lose of resistance resulting in movement is how work is created. If nothing
moves, there is zero work.
Three, the items on the roof disappearing into WTC 7 indicates the interior of WTC 7 collapsed before the facade of WTC 7 began to fall. The only
thing the NIST report claims is an isolated pixel on the north face of the facade, which the facade only started to fall once the interior collapsed,
reached the rate of free fall for a period of time in the middle of the collapse of the facade.
Is it really that hard to understand the only claim of WTC 7 falling at the rate of free fall only applies to the north facade for a period in the
middle of the facade’s collapse. Can you quote NIST to prove otherwise.
And is it really that hard to understand once a column buckles, it provides negligible resistance in the face of a dynamic load the building was most
likely not designed for? Especially if torque is applied at angles structural connections were never designed for.
If all resistance was removed, why did the facade slow down to a rate less the the rate of free fall before total collapse.
edit on 20-4-2018 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed