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.

 

WTC 7 could not collapsed from fire, but WTC 5 had partial collapse from fire?

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 01:08 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

What do you not understand AE 9/11 Truth uses falsehoods



9/11 and the Science
of Controlled Demolitions

www.skeptic.com...

3WHAT ABOUT THE ALMOST FREE-FALL COLLAPSE OF THE TWIN TOWERS? The key is the “almost” modifier. If I told you I was making almost $100,000 and you found out I was making only $67,000, you’d say I was exaggerating. So stop exaggerating the collapse speed of the WTC Towers! The 80,000 tons of structural steel slowed down the collapses of the Twin Towers to about ⅔ (two-thirds) of free-fall.3 And the core collapsed at about 40% of free-fall speed, coming down last.4 According to Richard Gage: “To bring a building symmetrically down, what we have to do is remove the core columns.” But on 9/11 the stronger core columns came down last, which violates this supposed most fundamental rule of controlled demolition.


The towers’ columns buckled, then the top of the buildings fell into the buildings below. The floors were stripped from the vertical columns. The vertical columns lost lateral support, then toppled in the wake of the floors collapsing.


edit on 4-8-2019 by neutronflux because: Fixed quote




posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 01:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bigburgh
a reply to: neutronflux

That's great the owner said pull it. Abandon hope.

No professional Fire Department isn't going to surround drown and ground. Protect life and property. The property was a threat to nearby property. Surround And drown yes, but building 7 was the most perfect let it fall structure I and many have ever seen. To perfect.

Edit: never saw a high pressure hose system on 7 while it came down by which are un-manned. We know to suppress soot, airborne particles.


How were they fighting the fire, they had no water? Please cite how WTC 7 fires were being actively fought.



posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 01:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Bigburgh

You


Never seen such a Perfect Free Fall with the the center going slightly first. falling in on itself.


In reality.

WTC 7 started with an internal collapse as indicated by the way the penthouse disappeared below the roof line. The internal collapse was from one side of the building, then worked its way to the other side.

A visible kink devolved in the building during the progressive collapse.

When the facade fell, it fell in three documented phases. The facade fell at free fall speed during the 2nd phase for 18 floors. then the facade slowed at the start of the third stage.

As a whole, WTC 7 fell slower than free fall.


The problem with your argument is it is a fantasy. The video evidence does not support your assertions:

WT7 Free Fall Speed


A more detailed account of WTC 7 collapse.



The Case of World Trade Center 7


sharpprintinginc.com...:559


SUMMARY OF EARLY WTC7 MOVEMENT


As was shown in section 2.5, features of the initial failure sequence can be understood as a rapid succession of 7 identifiable events occurring in the following order:

1) Movement Detected from 2 Minutes before Collapse
2) Increase of rocking 6 seconds before visible collapse
3) Ejections and overpressurizations
4) Collapse of the East Penthouse
5) Collective core failure
6) Perimeter response
7) Acceleration downward

CONCLUSIONS ON WTC7

The simulation was set up to fail. Even though the simulation bears almost no resemblance to the collapsed as documented, it is passively accepted as convincing by many.

It was gamed to collapse, and the collapse as simulated shows no key geometric features such as the collective core failure or flexure of the perimeter.

The issue of collective core failure leading to perimeter flexure and an extremely well-ordered collapse is not addressed at all. Instead, the public is asked to accept the simulated model even though it lacks an detail of the key geometric global features clearly visible in the collapse including:


1) Collective core dropping
2) Perimeter flexure as a response to the core falling
3) Building movement detectable from about 90 seconds before visible movement




COMPARISON OF NIST DESCRIPTION OF EARLY MOVEMENT OF WTC7 WITH THE ACTUAL VISUAL RECORD


1) Movement Detected from 2 Minutes before Collapse

Was never noticed by the NIST


2) Increase of rocking 6 seconds before visible collapse

This movement was measured by the NIST yet there is no explanation for it within their computer simulations of the collapse.

3) Collective core failure

Not noted or modeled in the NIST report

4) Perimeter response

Not noted in the NIST report. The Core-perimeteer action that is such an important feature in the early collapse process is not noted in the NIST report

5) Acceleration downward

Was measured incorrectly within the reports. The core-perimeter interaction was not understood and there were multiple problems with the NIST camera #3 tracking as listed earlier.



posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 01:32 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Forward Lay.
Yes pipes broke that day. But not all, NYFD did everything they could including hooking up from blocks away, then to the next Apparatus and the next...

www.firefighterbasics.com...



posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 01:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bigburgh
a reply to: neutronflux

Forward Lay.
Yes pipes broke that day. But not all, NYFD did everything they could including hooking up from blocks away, then to the next Apparatus and the next...

www.firefighterbasics.com...



Can you cite a source WTC 7 fires were actively being fought

You might read this link at metabunk before you answer...




www.metabunk.org/wtc7-firefighting.t2560/
www.metabunk.org...


Now....

By the why, the opening post was “WTC 7 could not collapsed from fire, but WTC 5 had partial collapse from fire?”

Based on the fire related failures of WTC 5, how could anyone rule out fire related failure of WTC 7?



posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 01:46 AM
link   
What I think adds to the mystery is what Bldg 7 is reported to have contained as far as files on current investigations. Enron. Money laundering tied to Russia Kazakhstan and other countries organized crime, and more. All went up in smoke that morning.

I really don’t want to have to enter the info again, so for those of you interested, it’s in p. 12 or 13 of the Felix Sater thread. Just searching for Bldg 7 on ATS.

Oddly enough, my extensive research on Sater led me to find an “unpublished” seemingly official looking 9/11 Commission Report version from 2008 which may be of interest to a few of you, too. I can’t recall what page it’s on in the thread. Try the names Adnan Khashoggi or Richard Armitage on ATS search and should take you there.



posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 02:08 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

So let's see here; WTC 7 was demo'd, WTC 1 and 2 were too, the Pentagon's budget records got smashed by a cruise missile, then we went to war in Afghanistan and the opiate crisis went through the roof, there was Iraq and the subsequent overthrows/destruction of Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Yemen, Oman, Syria, etc etc.

We have the Patriot Act which is completely unpatriotic, indefinite detentions, wiretaps, search and seizures, etc. Then when that expired we got the Freedom Act which is completely against Freedom, lol.

It's so obvious what they did here.
It's all about Power.

We are still in a state of national emergency btw.
Probably will be forever more...

Oh but don't you worry yourself, there's probably nothing to all this. The wiki page on Sept 11th attacks is vast and in depth and only devotes one tiny little sentence to the wacky conspiracy theories...

9/11 conspiracy theories have become social phenomena, despite lack of support from expert scientists, engineers, and historians.[313]


There is no support from any experts. So let's just go watch some mindless tv and forget about all this.



posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 02:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Bigburgh
a reply to: neutronflux

Forward Lay.
Yes pipes broke that day. But not all, NYFD did everything they could including hooking up from blocks away, then to the next Apparatus and the next...

www.firefighterbasics.com...



Can you cite a source WTC 7 fires were actively being fought

You might read this link at metabunk before you answer...




www.metabunk.org/wtc7-firefighting.t2560/
www.metabunk.org...


Now....

By the why, the opening post was “WTC 7 could not collapsed from fire, but WTC 5 had partial collapse from fire?”

Based on the fire related failures of WTC 5, how could anyone rule out fire related failure of WTC 7?



Are you now saying Epstein didn't say pull it for 7 and not collapse? 7 was built behind 5
Original building (1987–2001)

Original building
5 is in front of incoming damage..



Per Wiki.5 World Trade Center (5 WTC) was originally a steel-framed nine-story low-rise office building built in 1970–72 at New York City's World Trade Center. The building was designed by Minoru Yamasaki and Emery Roth & Sons. The structure was 118 ft (36 m) tall and had a black exterior. It suffered severe damage and partial collapse on its upper floors as a result of the September 11 attacks in 2001. The remaining structure was demolished by the Port Authority in December 2001, making way for reconstruction. The building was L-shaped and occupied the northeast corner of the World Trade Center site. Overall dimensions were 330 by 420 feet (100 by 130 m), with an average area of 120,000 square feet (11,000 m2) per floor.



posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 02:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Bigburgh



Are you now saying Epstein didn't say pull it for 7 and not collapse? 7 was built behind 5
Original building (1987–2001)


Who’s Epstein in the context of WTC 7? And what does that have to do with “WTC 7 could not collapsed from fire, but WTC 5 had partial collapse from fire?”.



posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 02:38 AM
link   
a reply to: muzzleflash



So let's see here; WTC 7 was demo'd,


There is zero evidence from the video, audio, seismic, and physical evidence of WTC 7 being brought down by pyrotechnics.

One, reported on going WTC 7 structural failures and a bulging wall before collapse initiation.

Two, damage from WTC towers and wide spread fires makes it highly unlikely a CD system would maintain its integrity to actuate. Especially if the supposed CD had to remove the resistance of every floor.

Three. Supposedly a CD system actuated on every floor? Is that false. From the facade that achieved the rate of free fall, there is no visible evidence the exterior columns of WTC 7 were cut. No audio of detonations indicative of a force with the energy to cut steel columns. No evidence cutting charges from the exterior columns cut into the facade. No flashing, sparking, or visible pressure transients from the WTC 7 facade windows at the exterior columns.



posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 02:40 AM
link   
On a personal note.. I responded to Shanksville September 11th. I saw no bodies, a crater and obliterated metal. It was a
Hole. Burnt.

The crater matched what was consistent of Flight 427 U.S.Air... except for charred mannequins. I have Polaroid's and processed 35mm of 427... and ATS would ban my butt yesterday for posting them.


Neutron have this 🌟.



posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 02:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Bigburgh




I have Polaroid's and processed 35mm of 427

Let me be the first to say bull#.



posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 02:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Bigburgh

How was fire related collapse of WTC 7 impossible? How do you prove a negative? Does the fire related failures of WTC 5 show fire related failures in WTC 7 were possible?



edit on 4-8-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 02:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Bigburgh




I have Polaroid's and processed 35mm of 427

Let me be the first to say bull#.


Let me say, you have no clue😊

Edit:
For once I got you beat.
edit on 4-8-2019 by Bigburgh because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 06:03 AM
link   
I have to say reading that article form the dailymail is like reading any other conspiracy theory post on any forum, I wouldn't be surprised to read it on ATS rather than the DailyMail. It's just a complete rehash of everything that 9/11 truthers have been saying for years with zero new information. Most of the claims are just the usual rubbish about the BBC report and how fast it fell all stuff that has been debunked.

I used to write quite extensively on this forum regarding 9/11 and the many false claims about what happened that day. WTC-7 was always floated as the smoking gun of the Truther community. There has always been one simple question however that utterly destroys any claims about WTC-7 without really having to do any research or have any understanding of how the building collapsed.

WHY???

Why do it, lets suppose it is this grand false flag and as part of that the perpetrators behind it rig up WTC-7 with explosives to bring it down....why would they do that?

I have never seen a single reasonable answer to this question and I don't expect after all these years to see one now its important because with out any clear motivation for bringing down that building nothing else makes sense.
edit on 4-8-2019 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 08:28 AM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Because WTC 7 was supposedly the most efficient way to secretly destroy CIA and DOD files vs a shredder? 😆. So the government got the firefighters not killed in WTC 1 and 2, Larry Silverstein, the BBC reporter, and the cleanup crew in on the cover up. And somehow flight 93 was to fly into WTC 7.

Yes, sarcasm.



posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 08:37 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

You’re in denial, pure and simple. Move on with your life



posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: neutronflux

You’re in denial, pure and simple. Move on with your life


Have you ever considered that you might be in denial, not making the accusation just asking the question.



posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 01:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: neutronflux

You’re in denial, pure and simple. Move on with your life


Sorry. AE 9/11 Truth are a bunch of charlatans with a long documented history of exploiting 9/11. How’s that $300,00.00 in donations for the WTC 7 Evaluation study coming along? Late by three years now?
edit on 4-8-2019 by neutronflux because: Added donations



posted on Aug, 4 2019 @ 06:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Bigburgh

After the water mains were cut by the collapse of the Twin Towers the FDNY laid in a supply line from fire boats in the Hudson River several blocks away

In WTC 7 the FDNY crews sent to search the building in wake of Twin Towers collapse found significant structural damage
starting with a 20 story gash in the south façade (side which faced WTC towers), elevator cars ejected from shafts, stairways blocked with debris

Also found that the internal standpipes were inoperable, so even if could get water to WTC 7 the internal plumbing system was not working , so was no way to transport water to where if was needed

Without water and working elevator system no FDNY commander is going to put men in that building - would be too
easy to become trapped

As WTC 7 was abandoned (I know several people who worked in building, it was evacuated at 930 before the Towers collapse) , with fire breaking out on several fires, the order was given for the FDNY to clear the building

Mid afternoon a bulge 3 stories high was seen forming in the SW corner of WYC 7 - this lead to collapse zone being
formed around WTC 7 and area cleared at about 2 )M

WTC was left to burn until collapsed at 520 PM




top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join