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.
Originally posted by BigTrain
Like I said before, and Ill say it for the last time, we design these structures to remain standing under static vertical loads. STATIC VERTICAL LOADS, meaning not moving.
Once that upper portion of the structure started to move, there was not nearly enough stiffness or over-strength to resist it. ABSOLUTELY no chance in hell that the bottom portion of the building could stop the momentum of the upper floors.
Train
Disclaimer No. 4
NIST takes no position as to whether the design or construction of a WTC building was compliant with any code
since, due to the destruction of the WTC buildings, NIST could not verify the actual (or as-built) construction, the
properties and condition of the materials used, or changes to the original construction made over the life of the
buildings. In addition, NIST could not verify the interpretations of codes used by applicable authorities in determining
compliance when implementing building codes. Where an Investigation report states whether a system was
designed or installed as required by a code provision, NIST has documentary or anecdotal evidence indicating
whether the requirement was met, or NIST has independently conducted tests or analyses indicating whether the
requirement was met.
Originally posted by BigTrain
Anyone who thinks this looks like a controlled demo is an idiot...
When people are scared of the truth, their mind will find anything to justify ignoring the screaming reality. If believing a lie makes you more comfortable that lie becomes the truth to you, and you will argue black is white. Anon
so even NIST doesn't know the as-built construction of the towers?
due to the destruction of the WTC buildings, NIST could not verify the actual (or as-built) construction, the
properties and condition of the materials used, or changes to the original construction made over the life of the
buildings. In addition, NIST could not verify the interpretations of codes used by applicable authorities in determining
compliance when implementing building codes.
Originally posted by ANOK
So you're trying to tell me if you were to take out say 20% of the collumns on one side it would cause all the other collumns to fail at exactly the same time?
[edit on 26/4/2006 by ANOK]
Originally posted by BigTrain
Yes. thats exactly how it works. Why wouldnt they? Once it goes, it goes.
So you're trying to tell me if you were to take out say 20% of the collumns on one side it would cause all the other collumns to fail at exactly the same time?
Originally posted by HowardRoark
Posted by SwitchbladeNGC in another thread.
What do we actually know about WTC building 7? We know that it was not hit by any planes, yet it collapsed several hours after the two towers fell. What else is there that is known about building 7 that may shed some light on how and why it fell?
- The building was built over an existing electrical substation. This required that the building be designed with an elaborate transfer truss system.
- There were some extensive modifications to the structure of the building. The top floors were rebuilt and a penthouse added.
- The building house a number of emergency generators (complete with day tanks) on several different floors. The generators were fed from four separate storage tanks – details
- Some of the above mentioned tanks were found to be largely empty after they were excavated. (I’m still looking for where I read that)
Originally posted by HowardRoark
The building was extensively damaged by falling debris from WTC 1 (read the following firefighters accounts: Boyle, hayden, Visconti
Originally posted by HowardRoark
There is evidence that like the towers, the sprayed on fireproofing in WTC 7 had deteriorated since the building was built.
There was a clear sequence of events in the collapse that is usually ignored by the pro-demo theorists
Originally posted by Skibum
Basically stating that there are things that no matter how much investigating goes on will still be unknown. You cannot verify how something is built when it was destroyed, nor can you verify the opinion about building codes(they are subject to alot of personal opinion and personal interpretations) of a building inspector 30 years ago.
doesn't even CONSIDER the possibility the building could have been demo'd on purpose
NIST has seen no evidence that the collapse of WTC 7 was caused by bombs, missiles, or controlled demolition.
Originally posted by Skibum
Whos is saying they failed at the exact same time.
Take a few hours and actually read all the NIST reports instead of relying on the selectively edited and totally wrong interpretations of them all presented in a nice mind controlling package by your masters.
If you are going to try to debunk the reports at least read them and have an small idea of what they REALLY say.
For a building to fall straight down all the collumns have to fail at the same time or within seconds to control the fall.
minimal damage
small fires
Originally posted by ANOK
Originally posted by BigTrain
Yes. thats exactly how it works. Why wouldnt they? Once it goes, it goes.
LOL you really don't know anything about buildings or physics do you?
Why wouldn't they? Why would they all fail at exactly the same time? All you can answer is why wouldn't they?
Go to school or something...
Sry but this is getting to be just silly.
Originally posted by Griff
Thanks for the link Skibum. I'm going to look at it closer. Heck, it might even sway me one way or the other.
Big Train. I don't think it's as easy as you are saying. Plus, I'm a little rusty with structural calcs. When I was in college, the pc was just becoming popular and there wasn't an internet yet....so, I don't really know how to use the programs out there. I have SAP 2000 (I think that's what it's called). Do you know this program by chance? Or could you point me in the right direction on how to learn to use it? Or if you could give me a copy of a program that's easy to use? Not trying to pirate a program here if that's what people are thinking.