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.

 

Explosions - Bottom floor WTC

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 06:54 PM
link   
No, no pwn. This isn't a pissing contest. This is (or at least it should be) an attempt to discuss the FACTS. So, no, I'm not going to accept a news article written by journalists as a superior source to the specifications and the NIST report about the configuration of the elevators in the building. The government, via FEMA and the NIST has requested (via my tax dollars and their endorsement) that I accept the NIST final report as the authoritative statement on why the towers collapsed so I'm pretty much stuck with using them for the facts of the tower configuration, else we have nothing to discuss here.

[edit on 11-7-2006 by Valhall]




posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 08:37 PM
link   
What you are missing is that the report does not contradict the NIST report.

While it says that only one elevator went continuously from the top to the bottom basement, that does not contradict the fuel moving between shafts.

If one elevator went down that far, then more elevators also went down that far, and while the elevators did not go to the upper floors, the shafts did.

Why else were so many people killed or burned in the elevators, and why did Rodriguez smell fuel, if it is impossible for the fuel to be there?

Answer, it is not impossible and is exactly what happened.

All of the elevators were in the core, and all of them were in close proximity to each other.

Nowhere in NIST does it dispute this.

Nowhere does the NIST report say that the damage was not caused by jet fuel, nor does it say that it would be impossible for it to make it to the basement.

You can attempt to spin it anyway you want, but the article and NIST are not in contradiction.


And no you did not "give the link", you linked the entire NIST .pdf, what page numbers? And you haven't quoted anything about what you just stated about the elevator configurations, why don't you quote the NIST and give page numbers so we can be on the same page.


Unless I'm missing a post, the only thing you quoted was NIST talking about the fire proofing. Nowhere did you quote anything about elevator shafts being given over to office space.

Here is a quote from NIST saying that both cases were true, with some lower zones given over to office space and others stacked on top of each other.


NIST Report pg. 39

In this way, the local elevators within a zone were placed on top of one another within a common shaft. Local elevators serving the lower portion of a zone were terminated to return to the space occupied by those shafts to leasable tenant space.


So while some terminated, some also stacked, this does not rule out fuel making it to the basement. The upper parts of the basement zone could have easily been stacked up to shafts that went to the impacted floors.


Again, why did Rodgrizuez smell fuel if it was impossible for jet fuel to make it to the basement?



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 08:47 PM
link   
Found another relevant NIST quote.


NIST report page 61

The elevators were equipped through normal modernization with fire service recall. Most were damaged by the aircraft impacts;


Obviously NIST has no problem with the impacts damaging most of the elevators, and since some were stacked and some were not, obviously even the non-stacked ones were damaged by the impacts.



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 09:06 PM
link   
Oh, so you can read the report for yourself.

Yes, I never said that the elevators weren't damaged. I did say that several occupants were still able to evacuate the building via a number of elevators. And I did say that no where in that report will you find that any elevators were blown to the bottom of any shafts due to an FAE.



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
No, no pwn. This isn't a pissing contest. This is (or at least it should be) an attempt to discuss the FACTS. So, no, I'm not going to accept a news article written by journalists as a superior source to the specifications and the NIST report about the configuration of the elevators in the building. The government, via FEMA and the NIST has requested (via my tax dollars and their endorsement) that I accept the NIST final report as the authoritative statement on why the towers collapsed so I'm pretty much stuck with using them for the facts of the tower configuration, else we have nothing to discuss here.

[edit on 11-7-2006 by Valhall]


Exactly Valhall. Why I have my sig as my sig. Keep up the good fight Val!!! Nothing to add to the thread....sorry.



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeftBehind

If one elevator went down that far, then more elevators also went down that far, and while the elevators did not go to the upper floors, the shafts did.


Prove it. If Howard can get away with one liners....so can I.



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 09:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeftBehind

Again, why did Rodgrizuez smell fuel if it was impossible for jet fuel to make it to the basement?



Have you ever been near a keroseen heater? It smells bad. I would think that a jet fuel fire some 90 floors above would be enough to smell it. Don't you?



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeftBehind
If one elevator went down that far, then more elevators also went down that far, and while the elevators did not go to the upper floors, the shafts did.


I think you need to go research this a little before you base your whole argument on something that is not true.

If the shafts went all the way why did they split up the elevators? Have you asked yourself that?

They do it so they don't have a single open shaft that can act as a chimney in a fire, and to save space. How are they accomplishing either if the shafts are there where there is no elevator? In fact that would take up more space, no?

Have you ever been in a building like the WTC? It's obvious the shafts are not open all the way up the building.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 09:41 AM
link   

"The other primary obstacle to be overcome in the skyscraper is the elevator system, and Yamasaki has shown himself equally imaginative here. A combination of express and local elevator banks, called a skylobby system, it is particularly efficient because it requires fewer elevator shafts—thus freeing approximately 75 percent of the total floor area for occupancy; had a conventional elevator arrangement been adopted, only approximately 50 percent would have been available. The building has three vertical zones; express elevators serve skylobbies at the forty-first and seventy-fourth floors; from these, and from the plaza level, four banks of local elevators carry passengers to each of the three zones."


Source

and...



Which clearly shows there is one elevator shaft that runs the full length of both WTC 1 & 2. So I guess my question is to all of you saying the elevator shafts run the full length of the tower(s) is, Where did you get this information from?

And how did this enormous fireball rip down the North Tower's ONE shaft that ran the full length of the building which stands over a thousand feet tall, blowing out the lobby as we've heard in eyewitness reports. Oh, and in those reports too, those same people claim the majority of the fuel that would shoot the fireball roaring through this one elevator shaft, also state that alot of the fuel burned away at impact. And no, I'm not sourcing this right now because if you've followed the whole 'theory" movement of 9|11, you'll know I'm not just pulling this out of my rear end, that everyone really did say that the majority of the fuel DID burn up on that day.

But hey, what do I know? I'm just a 21 year old college kid right?



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Have you ever been in a building like the WTC? It's obvious the shafts are not open all the way up the building.


It's obvious, or you have something to back this up?

Saying something is obvious is merely an arrogant way of stating your opinion.

The NIST report clearly states that elevators were stacked in the same shafts. With all of the elevators grouped together in the core, they would have to be.

While it may be obvious to you Anok, it is still not correct.

Truth,

that image is not to be taken literally, it is merely an example of how the elevators ran in zones.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by LeftBehind

Originally posted by ANOK

Have you ever been in a building like the WTC? It's obvious the shafts are not open all the way up the building.


It's obvious, or you have something to back this up?

Saying something is obvious is merely an arrogant way of stating your opinion.

The NIST report clearly states that elevators were stacked in the same shafts. With all of the elevators grouped together in the core, they would have to be.

While it may be obvious to you Anok, it is still not correct.

Truth,

that image is not to be taken literally, it is merely an example of how the elevators ran in zones.



I'd like for you to show me the sources that show that all of the elevator shafts ran the full length of the building. Because, if I'm interpreting the quote I posted above....


"The other primary obstacle to be overcome in the skyscraper is the elevator system, and Yamasaki has shown himself equally imaginative here. A combination of express and local elevator banks, called a skylobby system, it is particularly efficient because it requires fewer elevator shafts—thus freeing approximately 75 percent of the total floor area for occupancy; had a conventional elevator arrangement been adopted, only approximately 50 percent would have been available. The building has three vertical zones; express elevators serve skylobbies at the forty-first and seventy-fourth floors; from these, and from the plaza level, four banks of local elevators carry passengers to each of the three zones."


They wanted to save floor space so instead of having elevator shafts all over the place, they adopted this system which was very innovative at the time of WTC 1 & 2's inception.

But please, feel free to show me proof that ALL of these shafts ran the full lenght (or height) of the towers.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 10:28 AM
link   
I already did truth.


NIST report

NIST Report pg. 39

In this way, the local elevators within a zone were placed on top of one another within a common shaft. Local elevators serving the lower portion of a zone were terminated to return to the space occupied by those shafts to leasable tenant space.


Some had shared shafts, some did not. Most of them were damaged by the impact, so most of them were affected throught the elevator shafts that ran through.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by LeftBehind
I already did truth.


NIST report

NIST Report pg. 39

In this way, the local elevators within a zone were placed on top of one another within a common shaft. Local elevators serving the lower portion of a zone were terminated to return to the space occupied by those shafts to leasable tenant space.


Some had shared shafts, some did not. Most of them were damaged by the impact, so most of them were affected throught the elevator shafts that ran through.


Yes, some elevators used the SAME SHAFT. But nothing in that above quote states what you're stating, that all the shafts ran the length of WTC 1 & 2. I'd like to see proof of all the elevator shafts running the full length of both towers.

And yes, I'd assume that alot had damage to them from the plane crashes (and impending explosions within the building) but again I would like to see proof that the elevator shafts ran the full length [height] of the building.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 01:01 PM
link   
The question is not how many elevators went to the lobby! It's how many went FROM THE IMPACT FLOORS, TO THE BASEMENTS.

Only one did: the main freight, 50A, and it did not collapse to the basements, and it was not rocked by an FAE, and its operator survived.


Originally posted by TruthSeekerMP
Which clearly shows there is one elevator shaft that runs the full length of both WTC 1 & 2.


This is an express elevator that went only to the lobby. The main freight isn't shown there.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
The question is not how many elevators went to the lobby! It's how many went FROM THE IMPACT FLOORS, TO THE BASEMENTS.

Only one did: the main freight, 50A, and it did not collapse to the basements, and it was not rocked by an FAE, and its operator survived.


Originally posted by TruthSeekerMP
Which clearly shows there is one elevator shaft that runs the full length of both WTC 1 & 2.


This is an express elevator that went only to the lobby. The main freight isn't shown there.


Excellent, thank you for the insight. And still this shows that what I said was true, only one shaft goes the length (height) of the building. If someone can prove myself or bsbray wrong, please do... I'd like to see the information.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 01:53 PM
link   
It really can't even be debated.

The guys that installed the elevators -- Otis Elevator Company -- says that only one elevator ran the basement floors through the greatest height of the shafts.

NIST says it too.

All of this information has already been discussed, thoroughly probed, and is now hosted as an encompassing article here: www.studyof911.com...

Otis Elevator Company details the facts here: www.otis.com...

And NIST sources are cited in the first link.


Was there an FAE that traveled down this shaft and destroyed much basement structure?

NO! Or else the operator of that elevator would surely have been killed by the massive overpressures and heat that destroyed a machine shop, blew out elevators, etc. on the lower floors and basement!

We're still waiting for a better explanation for those of you that are still sucking up to the official reports here.

[edit on 8-11-2006 by bsbray11]



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeftBehind

Originally posted by ANOK

Have you ever been in a building like the WTC? It's obvious the shafts are not open all the way up the building.


It's obvious, or you have something to back this up?

Saying something is obvious is merely an arrogant way of stating your opinion.

The NIST report clearly states that elevators were stacked in the same shafts. With all of the elevators grouped together in the core, they would have to be.



Once again, I'll repeat. The local elevators within a zone were stacked one on top of another in the same shaft. Those local elevator shafts terminated at bottom and top within that zone. However, the express elevators for the different zones were not stacked in the same shafts. They terminated at the bottom floor of the upper zone they serviced. So you have elevators that ran from the lobby to zone two (40 something floor) and then you had elevators that ran from the lobby to the third zone (78th floor). You did not have to transfer from one express elevator at Zone 2 and get on another express elevator to go to Zone 3. You either took a Zone 2 elevator or a Zone 3 elevator. Transferring between elevators came when you arrived at an express elevator end point (skylobby) and then transferred to a local elevator within that zone.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeftBehind

Originally posted by ANOK

Have you ever been in a building like the WTC? It's obvious the shafts are not open all the way up the building.


It's obvious, or you have something to back this up?


I don't need to back this up, it's common sense. Go visit a freaking high rise building and look for your damn self. Jeez, do you have to have everything handed to you!

I ask again how is space saved if they have empty unused elevator shafts running through the building? Use some common sense!

How can someone base a belief on something they are ignorant about?
Shouldn't you get all your facts right before spouting off? Arn't you going to look silly if I'm right? What will you come up with then, that the fires made their own shafts?


A smart person would find out before they continued arguing based on ignorance.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
It really can't even be debated.

What your documents show is that there was one elevator that serviced all the floors, yes: Car #50. However there was another, Car #6, that served "B1-5, 44, 75, 77-107" ( wtc.nist.gov... ), so running from the impact point down to the basement. Might that not be relevant?

[edit on 8-11-2006 by ashmok]



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 06:05 PM
link   
www.youtube.com...

3:33 time. Anybody here an explosion? We would have heard it from the bottom.

Also, those loud noises before 3:33 are people crashing down...

[edit on 8-11-2006 by deltaboy]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join