Originally posted by bsbray11
Watch out, Mr. Mulder. You have to be careful with how you word things around Mr. Roark.

You should say "skyscraper," or "steel skyscraper" when you're referencing those specifically. If you just say "building," Howard will have a field day posting pictures of wooden two-story buildings that have burned down.

Just sharing some experience.

Thanks. I went ahead and changed that just to be safe.

CAN is like saying COULD.
But NONE have ( present ) and NEVER did ( past ) except on 9/11

Originally posted by mrmulder
But no skyscraper EVER has. I've seen pictures of skyscrapers that have burned for hours and are still standing.

Ah, but how many of those are steel framed skyscrapers?

How many were built over electrical vaults with elaborate transfer trusses on the 6th floor?

How many of them were severely damaged by falling debris before they caught fire?



[edit on 20-4-2006 by HowardRoark]

Originally posted by HowardRoark
Ah, but how many of those are steel framed skyscrapers?

How many were built over electrical vaults with elaborate transfer trusses on the 6th floor?

How many of them were severely damaged by falling debris before they caught fire?
[edit on 20-4-2006 by HowardRoark]

As Mr. Jones pointed out: "No steel-framed building." So obviously he's saying no steel-framed skyscraper has ever collapsed due to fire.

You need to show me pictures of the severe damage to the building.



[edit on 20-4-2006 by mrmulder]

How about testimony from Captain Chris Boyle, an 18 year veteran of the NYFD?

. So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.

Then this other officer I’m standing next to said, that building doesn’t look straight. So I’m standing there. I’m looking at the building. It didn’t look right, but, well, we’ll go in, we’ll see.

I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.

Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?

Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it.

You said:

Originally posted by mrmulder
I've seen pictures of skyscrapers that have burned for hours and are still standing.

Did you bother to find out if they were, in fact, steel-framed buildings?



[edit on 20-4-2006 by HowardRoark]

Damaged by falling debris.... you mean dust?
As for that image... sorry, but that is NOT smoke from WTC 7 at all.It is DUST from tower 1 as it moves up and down the streets.As you can see in videos, the dust went in all directions.As it went down the street towards WTC 7, wind direction made it appear that the buidling was producing it, when in reality, it is dust being pushed upwards as it goes through the surrounding buildings.

Originally posted by HowardRoark
You said:

Originally posted by mrmulder
I've seen pictures of skyscrapers that have burned for hours and are still standing.

Did you bother to find out if they were, in fact, steel-framed buildings?



[edit on 20-4-2006 by HowardRoark]

As a matter of fact I have.

So what happened to the rest of the building if only dust was falling? There would have been steel pillars, and framing, and a lot of other large chunks of debris falling with the buildings.

Originally posted by mrmulder
As a matter of fact I have.

And did you find out that the Parque Plaza and the Windsor tower were in fact largely concrete framed strucures?

Double post. Sorry.

[edit on 20-4-2006 by mrmulder]

I am talking about this poopy image here.

I'm going to let you in on something:

Just because WTC7 didn't have an identical twin somewhere else on the globe, doesn't mean it came down naturally.

Since that's been your defense so far on this thread, why don't you go on the offensive a little and post something to actually prove that the fire brought it down. That doesn't mean waving your arms and saying, "lots of fire!" That means something a little more scientific.

So, have anything scientific and conclusive? Because those videos sure look a lot like a demo to me.

Originally posted by mrmulder
That's WTC7? I thought it was taller than that. Regardless, from that picture the building wouldn't have come down the way it did. If there was a hole in the side it would have tilted over. I'm no expert but that's just me thinking logically.

Considering it had a hole 20 stories tall !!!!
Man, I like how images get appear when it is 'time' for them to appear.Most have no time stamp on them so they are just put in the order that best fits the official story.Must be guys going, " this one looks like it goes here, and this one here, wait, make sure the time of day looks right..."