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: Why Does NIST Ignore Floors 1-7, Basement and Sub-Basements?

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 02:02 PM
link   
Maybe this image will help cut back on the speculation and assumptions.





Where are the massive diesel fires on the bottom floors?

What little fire I see looks pretty damned pathetic.




posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark
talk about assumptions. The designers of that system assumed that a leak would only occur within the inner pipe. They also assumed that any leaked fuel oil would drain back to the containment vessel. They assumed that he pipe would not be damaged from exterior forces.


Either way the low pressure monitoring system should have shut the pumps down, so what exactly is your point?


Originally posted by HowardRoark
Reading that, I think it is entirely within the realm of possibility that the physical damage to the building from the collapse of WTC 1, also damaged this pipe where is traversed the floor. Furthermore, if the pipe was bent or moved it would be entirely possible for that leaked fuel to not flow back to the containment vessel. Thus a breach in the line from exterior forces on the pipe might not have triggered the automatic shut off.


ANY loss in pressure should have shut the pumps down, not just a flow back.


Originally posted by HowardRoark
As for the tanks being full, I seem to recall that somewhere in one of these reports it states that the fuel delivery companies were responsible for keeping the tanks topped off at all times.


Again, an assumption. I thouhg you dealt in facts and always accused the "CTers" of dealingin assumption Howard Roark. I notice you are STILL unable to admit your false statemnts earlier in the thread or reply to more important facts I have pointed out regarding the generator systems. Pot meet kettle.



posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
Maybe this image will help cut back on the speculation and assumptions.





Where are the massive diesel fires on the bottom floors?

What little fire I see looks pretty damned pathetic.


I am also not seeing any MASSIVE CRATER...



posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Slap Nuts

I am also not seeing any MASSIVE CRATER...


Wrong side of the building.



posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Where are the massive diesel fires on the bottom floors?

What little fire I see looks pretty damned pathetic.


Do you have a time stamp on that photo?

Even the firemen stated that the fires took some time to develop.



posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark

Originally posted by Slap Nuts

I am also not seeing any MASSIVE CRATER...


Wrong side of the building.


The photo of the "right" side of the building has no MASSIVE CRATER, so I was hoping to find one in any WTC7 photo. But, unlike HowardRoark, I can admit when I am wrong. The non-existant crater should not be in this side of the building.

Still dodging the important facts HowardRoark and still unable to admit your mistakes.



posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark
Do you have a time stamp on that photo?

Even if he did you would have some other way to claim it is worthless...



posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark
Do you have a time stamp on that photo?


Here's a good hint: That's the North face of the building, and the sun sets in the West.


Also note how high the sunlight is on the building that it's directly hitting. That suggests the sun isn't very high in the sky. And obviously, both Towers would have been collapsed by this point. This is also fairly obvious from the thick concrete powder in the image.

I would say between 1 and 4 pm, favoring maybe around 2 or 3'ish.

Even if the fires did build up before collapse (and in that case, I have a feeling we would have seen more fire in collapse videos -- we did not), IT TAKES EVEN MORE TIME -- MUCH MORE TIME -- TO HEAT UP THE STEEL TO CAUSE FAILURE.

What knocked the fireproofing off of WTC7's columns? And wasn't it reinforced concrete?

That's going to take more than a couple hours of large fire, HowardRoark, to begin to cause failures. I would think even you would realize this.

[edit on 21-8-2006 by bsbray11]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join