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.
You have a limited understanding of engineering principles. A freefall descent can only occur when there literally nothing left inside the building to resist the dead load.
How long would it take 82 columns to buckle? Provide your math and science, please? And match your math to observables we can see on video?
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.
originally posted by: democracydemo
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin
Some do, this is why the Hulsey report has taken so long to complete and nailed IMHO. Hulsey did mention this substation issue in his presentations.
As for the topic: "WTC 7 could not collapsed from fire but... Whataboutism"
Says it all! The walls are closing in.
What’s the definition of con?
originally posted by: democracydemo
a reply to: neutronflux
You know date: ATS
What’s the definition of con?
Output by NIST and 9/11 Commission Report. Without scrutiny nor complete discovery process.
originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Jesushere
You have a limited understanding of engineering principles. A freefall descent can only occur when there literally nothing left inside the building to resist the dead load.
How long would it take 82 columns to buckle? Provide your math and science, please? And match your math to observables we can see on video?
It’s on video. How many seconds is the collapse of WTC 7 from the first signs of movement, until the movement of the penthouse, to the first movement of the facade, to the final collapse. From the first movement of the penthouse to WTC 7 is out of view is about 11 seconds?
The internal columns of WTC 7 did not fail all at the same instance. It’s was a progressive collapse that started on one side of the building, and worked to the opposite side. Then the facade fell.
Why are you creating false arguments not supported by the video evidence?
You wonder why people don’t want to debate conspiracists that will use right out falsehoods....
Seems like I posted this once before?
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.
Anyone who took the time to watch the WTC5 fire on video will notice the entire building was engulfed with smoke and fire. Reality is WTC5 girders in your picture withstood a very high temp fire and did not buckle.
A freefall descent can only occur when there literally nothing left inside the building to resist the dead load.
How long would it take 82 columns to buckle? Provide your math and science, please? And match your math to observables we can see on video?
originally posted by: Jesushere
originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Jesushere
You have a limited understanding of engineering principles. A freefall descent can only occur when there literally nothing left inside the building to resist the dead load.
How long would it take 82 columns to buckle? Provide your math and science, please? And match your math to observables we can see on video?
It’s on video. How many seconds is the collapse of WTC 7 from the first signs of movement, until the movement of the penthouse, to the first movement of the facade, to the final collapse. From the first movement of the penthouse to WTC 7 is out of view is about 11 seconds?
The internal columns of WTC 7 did not fail all at the same instance. It’s was a progressive collapse that started on one side of the building, and worked to the opposite side. Then the facade fell.
Why are you creating false arguments not supported by the video evidence?
You wonder why people don’t want to debate conspiracists that will use right out falsehoods....
Seems like I posted this once before?
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.
Not one steel-framed skyscraper had collapsed pre 9/11 due to fire alone. On 9/11 you got three in one day. How do they explain it fire?
originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Jesushere
You
A freefall descent can only occur when there literally nothing left inside the building to resist the dead load.
How long would it take 82 columns to buckle? Provide your math and science, please? And match your math to observables we can see on video?
What does that even mean? Are you saying the entire building fell at the rate of free fall? Where you trying to pass off a false argument, and now back pedaling.
You claim the exterior columns hade to have their resistance removed? Is that false?
I want physical evidence of those exterior columns right at the facade and the outer windows of WTC 7 were cut by pyrotechnics. You are just ignoring the exterior columns offered negligible resistance.
originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Jesushere
What are you calling “girders”? And where were they used in WTC 5?
originally posted by: Jesushere
originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Jesushere
What are you calling “girders”? And where were they used in WTC 5?
Look the first image you posted, It looks like A36 steel girders.
originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Jesushere
And I asked for physical evidence of pyrotechnics cutting columns. All your doing is playing word games with “negligible resistance”.
NIST never tested for explosives. Not my job to do this. Direct your complaints elsewhere.
originally posted by: Jesushere
originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Jesushere
And I asked for physical evidence of pyrotechnics cutting columns. All your doing is playing word games with “negligible resistance”.
NIST never tested for explosives. Not my job to do this. Direct your complaints elsewhere.
Are you insane- NIST debunked their own theory in Aug 2008.. Controlled demolition is the leading theory now.