Fire caused global collapse in wtc7? , page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 7 times


reply posted on 26-6-2009 @ 10:10 PM by C-JEAN
reply to post by jprophet420


Hi, jprophet420 and all waked up persons !

Here is my "point of view" and logics on the subject:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Blue skies.


reply posted on 26-6-2009 @ 10:19 PM by conrad x
Originally posted by C-JEAN
reply to
post by jprophet420


Hi, jprophet420 and all waked up persons !

Here is my "point of view" and logics on the subject:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Blue skies.



Dont be conned by the liars in the "truth" movement.

A film is coming out this Septemer exposing the lies of Alex Jones.

www.youtube.com...


reply posted on 26-6-2009 @ 11:22 PM by LiquidLight
reply to post by RRokkyy



We may never know the motive behind destroying wtc7, but the evidence just isn't there to suggest that it was the direct or indirect result of the planes flying into the buildings.

As for who could have known they were going to fly planes into buildings, I believe the official story in as far as Muslim terrorists hijacked planes and flew them into buildings; But I also believe that the U.S. Government knew it was going to happen and took full advantage of the situation.


reply posted on 26-6-2009 @ 11:25 PM by randyvs
reply to post by Desucher



I don't see what's so surprising here
no commercial building has ever fallen down from a fire in all of the history of buildings and none have since and none ever will. you don't see any
thing surprising w/ 3 falling on the same day. pull your head out!

dont just say its a lie either. back it up!

[edit on 26-6-2009 by randyvs]


reply posted on 26-6-2009 @ 11:29 PM by Desucher
Originally posted by randyvs
reply to
post by Desucher



I don't see what's so surprising here
no commercial building has ever fallen down from a fire in all of the history of buildings and none have since and none ever will.


That is a blatant lie.

[edit on 26-6-2009 by Desucher]


reply posted on 26-6-2009 @ 11:36 PM by randyvs
reply to post by Desucher



That is a blatant lie
saying its lie shows just how green you are on the subject.



reply posted on 26-6-2009 @ 11:45 PM by jprophet420
Originally posted by Desucher
Originally posted by randyvs
reply to
post by Desucher



I don't see what's so surprising here
no commercial building has ever fallen down from a fire in all of the history of buildings and none have since and none ever will.


That is a blatant lie.

[edit on 26-6-2009 by Desucher]


Its not a blatant lie at all. The original statement pushed by the 'truth movement' was that "No steel framed building has ever collapsed due to fire." That was slightly incorrect as there was one building in china that was a warehouse/storage shed that collapsed due to fire once. It was a temporary structure. The statement was then revised to "No steel framed high rise structure has ever collapsed due to fire prior to wtc7, and none since." That statement is 100% true and verifiable.

So while he was semantically incorrect, he was much closer to the truth of the matter than you.


reply posted on 26-6-2009 @ 11:47 PM by dragonridr
reply to post by jprophet420



More to the point who cares honestly if they wanted to demolish the building all they would have done is waited for the fires to burn out decare it unsafe then demolish the building. They would need to go through all this subterfuge. If you honestly believe they blew up the building they still could have done this legally days weeks months later by claiming the building was damaged and declaring it a public health risk!

So honestly why would they bother to fake it your theory doesnt make sense.


reply posted on 27-6-2009 @ 12:00 AM by jprophet420
Originally posted by dragonridr
reply to
post by jprophet420



More to the point who cares honestly if they wanted to demolish the building all they would have done is waited for the fires to burn out decare it unsafe then demolish the building. They would need to go through all this subterfuge. If you honestly believe they blew up the building they still could have done this legally days weeks months later by claiming the building was damaged and declaring it a public health risk!

So honestly why would they bother to fake it your theory doesnt make sense.


What theory have I presented? I asked people to either present evidence or go on record supporting the NIST theory. The theory that fires alone initiated a global failure collapse in wtc7.

I agree that that theory, the only one I have presented (and is NOT mine) in this thread , is utter hoggwash.


reply posted on 28-6-2009 @ 07:16 AM by hgfbob
Originally posted by edgar34
I have a hard time not believing the experts who spent years studying the collapse of wtc7.


Who spent years ...STUDYING?...more like 'THINKING' of a way that, FIRE alone could have done it...and they FAILED



BTW...the WTC7 report is a HYPOTHESIS....
a 'hypothesis' that has NO supporting facts...

NO steel was examined or even saved...ALL material destroyed

NO evidence of an 'INFERNO' that WOULD be needed to heat ALL the vertical support. EVENLY, to get the result of EVEN DECENT OF THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE, that WE SEE in EVERY video of 7 collapsing.....ALL video and picture evidence show ONLY spot fire, NEVER on more than 2 floors, and NEVER covering an ENTIRE floor....

They rely on HEARSAY for the amount of fire for their HYPOTHESIS.....and they IGNORE hearsay, about EXPLOSIONS and BOMBS going off..

[NCSTAR1A-3.2]"It is likely that much of the burning took place beyond the views of the windows"

[NCSTAR1A-3.2]
"The fires were fed by ordinary office combustibles"


There are NO pics of ANY FIRE in the NIST WTC7 report to support their HYPOTHESIS

NO mention of free fall ACCELERATION in their peer-reviewed draft from 8-08

Shyam Sunder, lead investigator for the NIST was confronted at a NIST Q&A BEFORE the final report came out...as to WHY, NO mention of free fall ACCELERATION in the peer reviewed draft, when it is so easily measured by the facade of the building...
here is the vid of him stumbling for an answer.

and he also says that..."free fall acceleration can ONLY occur when there is NO STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS BELOW IT"

and here is what NIST was forced to put in the final report...

[NICSTAR 1A 3.6]"constant, downward acceleration during this time interval. This acceleration was 32f/s^2,(9.8m/s^2), equivalent to the acceleration of gravity.
This free fall drop continues for approximately 8 stories or 32 meters,(105ft.), the distance traveled between t=1.75s and t=4.0 s.

when this occurs, the kink forms and the ENTIRE building is EVENLY falling

WE SEE IT happening...falling as fast as an object falls...THROUGH THE AIR
(actually, what they measured, should ONLY occur in a vacuum...with NO resistance...when a feather falls as fast as a marble...THAT is what falling at a rate equivalent to the acceleration of gravity is).

HOW CAN THIS HAPPEN?

as soon as the kink is formed, the HVAC, 'other' Penthouse, roof, facade, within 0.5 seconds from each other, have free fall ACCELERATION for 100+ft. ALL support was INSTANTLY taken away, AS WE SEE by the EVEN decent
if there was a progression from east to west
WE WOULD SEE IT
the roof WILL NOT support itself while columns fail below it. the facade is a non supporting structure, and IS attached to the perimeter columns it will not stand while the columns fail behind it.

how do you get,'EVERY' column to act the same way, at the same time, unless they are under the 'SAME' conditions, and acted on by the 'SAME' force???

At 4.0s of the collapse, the 'ENTIRE' building is falling faster than 80 ft.a second...'ONLY' possible by removing 'ALL' resistance...nothing in the way

just as Shyam Sunder says..."free fall acceleration can ONLY occur when there is NO STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS BELOW IT"
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 12 days ago with 14 member flags
9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 6 days ago with 12 member flags
Wikipedia categorizes 9/11 truth as \'denialism\'
  Posted 17 days ago with 11 member flags
Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 13 days ago with 6 member flags
new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 7 days ago with 6 member flags