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 Vushta
This has no 'downward force'???
Originally posted by Vushta
Source?
You know there is a vast difference between no and lessened.
Originally posted by Vushta
Yeah..yeah..yeah. But you are implying degrees of these forces and specifically stating that the degee of change in downward force was sufficient to cancel the possibility of collapse.
Source?
Originally posted by Vushta
There were other things going on during the collapse. Are you assuming that the only way for the core to have failed is by a straight down brute force crushing of the structure..like flattening a can with your foot?
Originally posted by Vushta
The official story requires that enough force was achieved to fail the connections and it just basically fell apart for lack of a better phrase.
Originally posted by Vushta
Source?
Originally posted by Vushta
Pancake theory = crushed core theory?....Source?
Originally posted by Vushta
How much force do you calculate would be needed to fail the connections?
"Basically" intact?
Originally posted by Vushta
Then how are you arriving at the conclusion that the KE was 'not enough'?
Originally posted by Duhh
Yeah' there was only fire.LOL LOL LOL. What about all the destruction from the crash that weakened the entire building,including the core.Funny as a crutch Griff.
[edit on 1-8-2006 by Duhh]
Originally posted by Griff
I like how some will say that it would take hundreds of tons of explosives to fail the building but believe that fire did the same thing under an hour. Yes, I'm ignoring the crash.....you know why? Because in BOTH scenarios, the plane crash is still present. Do you people understand yet?
Originally posted by Iggnorace_is_bliss
LOL....WoW Do you work for the government or something.....
And Yes I meant columns.....
Stop lying to people.......
Fire from the fuel tanks would have burnt off in 10 minutes..Tops
Nowhere I have ever seen has said it took "Tons" of explosives.
In fact Dr. Stephen Jones PHD said it would only take a couple of hundred pounds of Thermate, strategically placed in and around the UNOCCUPIED floors directly on the supporting columns.....
It upset's me that people like you don't do their research and proceed to comment about events, they obviously know nothing about.
Fires you say........ Wow.
< Maybe this guy did it?
Originally posted by Iggnorace_is_bliss
Sorry….BUT If you think for a second you can use physics to prove that they fell because of fire. GO BACK TO SCHOOL! Maybe even ask a welder what the properties of steel are? Ohh wait I am a welder and I know this isn't possible. Like I said there is no argument here. lol it's kinda scary that people can be fooled like this....wow
And for those who don't know yet. You would need a plasma cutter and it still wouldn't even come close to cutting those steel beams. lol it would take you a week! With a PLASMA cutter.
Originally posted by Valhall
But the question unanswered is what the heck was going on with the core when the top floors were cocked 20 degrees from vertical? Was the whole core bending 20 degrees? Was it still some what vertical and the structure bending around it?
That's a mind bender to consider.
2. Signi¯cant amount of ¯re insulation was stripped during aircraft impact by °ying debris
(without that, the towers would likely have survived). In consequence, many structural
steel members heated up to 600±C (NIST 2005) [the structural steel used loses about
20% of its yield strength already at 300±C, and about 85% at 600±C, NIST 2005; and
exhibits signi¯cant visco-plasticity, or creep, above 450± (e.g. Cottrell 1964, p. 299),
especially in the columns overloaded by load redistribution; the press reports right after
9/11, indicating temperature in excess of 800±C, turned out to be groundless, but Ba·zant
and and Zhou's analysis did not depend on that]. pg 2
Annealing studies on recovered steels (from NIST NCSTAR 1-3E) established the set of time and temperature conditions necessary to alter the steel microstructure. The microstructures of steels known to have been exposed to fire, based on the pre-collapse photographic evidence, were cahracterized. These microstructures show no evidence of exposure to temperatures above 600 C for any significant time. pg 281, wtc.nist.gov...
Di®erential thermal expansion, combined with heat-induced viscoplastic deformation,
caused the °oor trusses to sag. pg 2
Usefulness of Varying Demolition Mode. Ronan Point apartments, the Oklahoma City bombing, etc., demonstrate that only a vertical slice of building may undergo progressive collapse, while the remainder of building stands. Such a collapse is truly a three-dimensional problem, much harder to analyze, but some cases might allow adapting the present one-dimensional model as an approximation.
Originally posted by Griff
Valhall,
Notice that the first site doesn't say anything about time. The NIST report says "significant amount of time". Since the site desides to ignore this statement, then what they are saying is true.... "from a certain point of view".......OB1 Kanobi fades out...... Exactly what other people accuse (sp?) the CT sites of doing, this paper (I'm going from what you posted...I haven't read it yet) is doing as well.
[edit on 8/1/2006 by Griff]