FEMA says melted steel at WTC 7

Originally posted by bsbray11

Your responses to Orion remind me more of a bully than anyone with even a slight interest in anything intelligent. Everything for you apparently boils down to popular opinion and what everyone else believes anyway. You might as well not be on a conspiracy theory site my friend, it's not for you.


I also would not be surprised if the buildings were set up during construction for whatever happened to them. They were financed by Rockefellers, but that probably means nothing to you. All you can do is laugh at us and roll your eyes, but that's fine. No one cares what you think, either.

Sorry if I ruffle your feathers, just trying to inject a dose of reality into "your" lives.

I don't see you backing him up about the corners/floors arrangemnet though. Hmmm, now why is that?

Rockefellers..... glad to see that OS was able to straighten you out about that. Probably won't have much of an effect though. Too bad.

reply to post by Richard Gizinu


That was completely uncalled for. I did not "straighten out" anyone. All I did was interject exactly who paid for the WTC from start to finish. Rockefeller is quite the controller. No doubt about that. No one gets major financing without David Rockefeller's say so, particularly on public projects such as the WTC complex in NYC.

Prime real estate goes at a premium even when publicly funded. It only looks like private enterprise is doing all their own financing and nothing more. Private developers are always great spenders of other people's money, while skimming off the top for their extravagant living. Donald Trump is a prime example.

As for "backing up" anyone, how can someone not understanding construction "back up" anyone on something they do not understand him or herself?

Your comments lack logic and civility.

Originally posted by OrionStars

As for "backing up" anyone, how can someone not understanding construction "back up" anyone on something they do not understand him or herself?

So are you saying that bsbray, allegedly a structural engineering student, wouldn't be able to back your claim theory of these alleged "trusses and joists"?

reply to post by OrionStars



not that i want to start a big "to do" or anything but honestly your post makes no logical sense.

for a building to be "pre WIRED" for demo would add an expense that most people wouldnt care to add as it would be a LONG time before it would even be thought of as necessary so why add all that wire?

but thats a small matter.

the biggest issue i would like to raise about your hypothesis is that almost NO ONE uses "wires" to set off the actual charges during CD. they use an electric blasting cap to initiate the detcord which is what actually sets off the demo charges. the reason is that electric blasting caps arent as safe or as sure as non electric ones on detcord. electric caps can fail and when you wire a building right if one doesnt go off none of hte others in that particular ring main go off either. however, charges primed with detcord almost never fail. its the most sure way of doing it with the smallest margin of error and when working with explosives safety is #1.

but, dont take my word for it, talk to some other demo guys. if they disagree with me id love to hear their reasoning, great opportunity for me to learn as well.

reply to post by Richard Gizinu


Presumption on your part and nothing more, concerning my intent and meaning. If I had meant a particular individual, I would have stated as such. Unfortunately, presumptive people always manage to twist vague implications of others into something they are not. Congratulations. You are batting a thousand projecting your presumptuous nature.

reply to post by Damocles


It costs more after the building is finished than it does wiring when constructing. The people financing the building pay for the wiring and any pre-drilling to store the wiring, plus, have an opening for TNT when the day comes to legally pull any steel and concrete building.

Is that a problem for them they had no idea they had, looking to the future for redevelopment of any land, plus, changes in costs of materials and labor?

The electricians are already on site doing other wiring, and only have to wire on skeletal steel frames. They have to cut through nothing to run wiring. Saves on wiring as well, particularly when the copper market climbs excessively high, as it did in the late 1960s and into the early 1980s.

reply to post by OrionStars


which is why i said that was only a small part of it. but you also need to remember that whne a building is being prepped for demo its pretty much gutted inside. theres no need to run wires anywhere except across the floor....

HOWEVER

that doesnt change the fact that very few if any blasters are going to use exclusivly electric blasting caps. TYPICALLY they will only use 1 per floor/area to set off the detcord on each ringmain.

so, prewiring a building for a future demo is a pointless waste of time really.

Originally posted by OrionStars

Presumption on your part and nothing more, concerning my intent and meaning. If I had meant a particular individual, I would have stated as such. Unfortunately, presumptive people always manage to twist vague implications of others into something they are not. Congratulations. You are batting a thousand projecting your presumptuous nature.

Let's see, you, me, and bsbray were the only ones involved in this discussion. I asked bsbray why he didn't back you up. You responded that how can anyone who doesn't know........

IOW, you're just posting randomly.

reply to post by Richard Gizinu


I used general terms. Which parts of the words general and terms do you not comprehend?

reply to post by Damocles


It is already gutted when they do the wiring when buildings are under construction. They do not have to wait to run wiring until after they finished stripping the inside of already finished buildings. Some buildings are never completely stripped, because saftety factors in one area may not exist in others. For pre-wired buildings, the concern about wiring does not exist. When they get done salvaging and safety stripping, all they have left is setting the charges and attaching the wires.

Quite frankly, I have no idea why people are concerned with pre-wired buildings during construction for future demolitions, to make room for the whims of developers. Commercial buildings often have an average life of 30 years in metropolitan areas such as NYC.

1. It is legal.
2. The is no safety factor of concern.
3. It is highly cost effective.

What is the relevant problem with pre-wiring during construction?

reply to post by OrionStars


no, i see what youre trying to say, it just makes very little sense honestly. electric blasting caps come with several feet of wire on them and then they are usually connected in series when using electric caps to set off all of your charges.

however, the MOST common and SAFEST way to do it is to use detcord so there is simply no logical reason to prewire a building during the construction phase.

all i was trying to say

Originally posted by OrionStars


What is the relevant problem with pre-wiring during construction?

becuase its simply unneccessary honestly. theres no rational reason to do it.

reply to post by Damocles


Owners are concerned with cost. Experts are used to a variety of demolitions and materials to get the job done. If they want a job, they have to meet the owner paying the bill at least half way. Such is the way it goes in the business world.

What says any control demolition expert has to use that? Is it required for them to demolish buildings? Or is it something that can be used but does not have to be specifically used? Wiring is wiring when it comes to demoltions wiring. Does it matter if have to separately cap the wires to the explosives? The wires are not live when they do the pre-liminary work.

I still cannot see any problem with legally pre-wiring during construction, because they might have to do one extra step which takes little time to do. It is only wiring and nothing. It is not even live until ready to be used.

Is 9/11 and the "official" report standing in the way of the logical beneficial feasibility of it? According to the engineering article I read, various building owners had already done it during construction. If that article turns up again, I will definitely start a new discussion with link and excerpt to the article.

reply to post by Damocles



Maybe to you. But then if you are not involved in business and/or the construction industry, it may not make sense on cost effectiveness.

Originally posted by Richard Gizinu
Sorry if I ruffle your feathers,

That's alright. You have to be doing more than posting on an internet forum to 'ruffle my feathers'.

just trying to inject a dose of reality into "your" lives.

But how are you trying to do that? By being reasonable, or by having an attitude, and just appealing to authority every other chance you get?

I don't see you backing him up about the corners/floors arrangemnet though. Hmmm, now why is that?

Because I didn't even read any of it.

Rockefellers..... glad to see that OS was able to straighten you out about that. Probably won't have much of an effect though. Too bad.

Not really. Before the project was finished someone suggested the towers should be nicknamed "David" and "Nelson," so it's not like there wasn't involvement. And it wasn't like they couldn't have afforded it themselves if they wanted. But the name doesn't mean anything to you anyway.

[edit on 21-1-2008 by bsbray11]

Originally posted by bsbray11
[

just trying to inject a dose of reality into "your" lives.

But how are you trying to do that? By being reasonable, or by having an attitude, and just appealing to authority every other chance you get?

I don't see you backing him up about the corners/floors arrangemnet though. Hmmm, now why is that?

Because I didn't even read any of it.

Rockefellers..... glad to see that OS was able to straighten you out about that. Probably won't have much of an effect though. Too bad.

Not really. Before the project was finished someone suggested the towers should be nicknamed "David" and "Nelson," so it's not like there wasn't involvement. And it wasn't like they couldn't have afforded it themselves if they wanted. But the name doesn't mean anything to you anyway.

Ha, who was accusing who of being a bully? Sounds like someone got a little ruffled. But why a bully? Bullies usually pick on those that are unable to defend themselves. Surely you're not suggesting OS's inability to defend his statements?

What's the point in being reasonable with you guys anyway? I have yet to see any of you ever concede a point, no matter how obviously wrong you are. For example, OS and his whole floor/truss ideas. They are ludicrous and I have shown that to him, using one of his own research sites - 911research - that prove him wrong, and yet...... doesn't have the intellectual honesty to admit the lunacy. This is common among the CT crowd and I have no respect for it. Reminds me of that scene in Pulp Fiction, when Ving Rames is telling Bruce Willis about his pride f'ing with him. You guys have this problem. You are wrong, and you know it, yet your pride/disdain for Bush/distrust of "the man" won't let you look at this whole 9/11 issue honestly. Pilgrum posted a photo nearly exactly like the one I saw. Any one that is honest can see that what I have said about welds breaking, 2 sided welds, and weld depth are true. Yet you are silent about it, saying it's my opinion only. Take a look. Then, remembering the oath that a structural engineer must take when they get their license about not injecting personal beliefs, protecting the public, etc.... tell us what you think.

Since he needs a structural engineer to back him up on his floors, etc... and since you're allegedly an engineering student, do us both a favor and take the time to see what he says. And let us know what you think. He needs your help.

Your Rockefeller statements are a joke, right? It's just something Cts use to make them look cool while posting, right? Because if you're truly stating your beliefs, the world when you get out of college is gonna be a rude awakening. Why else do you think the Truthers are disappearing? Because they grow up and get a dose of reality.

truthers are far from disappearing. they are only disappearing from the endless staircase of circular arguments on the net.
AND, some are changing their focus to more immediate CRIMES and maneuvers of the "bush administration"(i put it in quotes, because the 'bush administration' is just the face of something far more nefarious and powerful.... the CFR and the NWO).
truthers are growing in number. and i'm not talking about the internet, here.
i'm talking about people i meet in real life, the same types who would have labelled me a wide-eyed paranoid a few years ago. i hear these people on the street talking about it, now.
i'm talking about AE911, and the japanese parliament, and a ragtag army of youtubers.

zeitgeist helped, a lot. what a great flik. people i've met are buying multiple copies, and handing them out.

how many know the truth has no bearing on the truth. what you are spouting is no more than tired apologist rhetoric.


however, be happy in your fox bubble.

Originally posted by Richard Gizinu
Then, remembering the oath that a structural engineer must take when they get their license about not injecting personal beliefs, protecting the public, etc.... tell us what you think.

I have taken no oath. We have a code of ethics but not an oath.

en.wikipedia.org...

Since he needs a structural engineer to back him up on his floors, etc...

I'll back him up on his floors. So does NIST. I had to dig but here's something of interest.

NISTNCSTAR1-1A.pdf "Design and Construction of Structural Systems (Draft)"

page 88 of 166 of the pdf. "Criteria for Design Slabs - Design Assumptions" scan from Worthington, Skilling, Helle & Jackson

h) Structural steel floor systems, including spandrals and bridging between floor beams or trusses, act together with the concrete.

Emhasis mine. It wouldn't state floor beams or trusses if there were only trusses.

Originally posted by Richard Gizinu
Ha, who was accusing who of being a bully? Sounds like someone got a little ruffled.

The discourse I was talking about was between you and Orion and had nothing to do with me.

Your Rockefeller statements are a joke, right? It's just something Cts use to make them look cool while posting, right? Because if you're truly stating your beliefs, the world when you get out of college is gonna be a rude awakening. Why else do you think the Truthers are disappearing? Because they grow up and get a dose of reality.

This is why I said you were bullying Orion more than responding with anything intelligent. None of what I'm quoting here is relevant to anything to do with 9/11 in the least. That whole paragraph is just a snipe.


PS -- I don't mean to stereotype but do you come here from JREF, Gizinu? I hope not, because that forum is kind of a running joke for its vitriol and hostility and arrogance all in the place of where its right-minded heads should be. Not saying that characterizes you but it's as if you feel we're that kind of crowd, but we're not, and we don't resonate with the way you're posting.

[edit on 22-1-2008 by bsbray11]