"That building is going to come down Next" Wtc-7, page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 7 times


reply posted on 29-10-2009 @ 06:51 PM by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Nutter



So NIST is wrong in their educated guess at what happened to WTC. Your point is?



reply posted on 29-10-2009 @ 06:55 PM by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Nutter



Reread it. He is speaking of the TOWERS. Back to the point, name five other highrises that were built with the same type of design as the towers.


BTW, just being on fire doesnt qualify as a match to any of the three buildings that fell that day. Although, we could discuss steel frame buildings that have had collapses due to only fire........


reply posted on 29-10-2009 @ 08:23 PM by Nutter
Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to
post by Nutter



So NIST is wrong in their educated guess at what happened to WTC. Your point is?


So, you admit that there needs to be a further investigation? Since they are incorrect in their educated guess, most scientists with any kind of scrupples would start over.


reply posted on 29-10-2009 @ 08:32 PM by Nutter
Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Reread it. He is speaking of the TOWERS. Back to the point, name five other highrises that were built with the same type of design as the towers.


There is no need to reread it. I can name one that was on fire far worse than the towers. First Insterstate Bank. A tube within a tube structure.

www.usfa.dhs.gov...

page 24 of 41. I'm sure there are others, it's not like Robertson and Skilling had a patent on the design.


BTW, just being on fire doesnt qualify as a match to any of the three buildings that fell that day. Although, we could discuss steel frame buildings that have had collapses due to only fire........


Like what? Temporary structures built in China were there are no building codes?


reply posted on 29-10-2009 @ 09:33 PM by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Nutter



Um, no, Im not saying that we need to waste time with another investigation. No one, will ever know the exact sequences involved in the collapse of WTC7, you can do a dozen investigations and they will all be educated guesses.


reply posted on 29-10-2009 @ 09:38 PM by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Nutter





A tube within a tube structure


Not quite..its close, but not quite the same. However, could you point out where the 767 crashed into the bank building at high speed?



reply posted on 29-10-2009 @ 09:44 PM by thedman
reply to post by Nutter



First Interstate Bank fire was actively fought by 400 members of LA
Fire. Decision made at WTC 7 to abandon building do to problems with
water supply and structural damage

www.mace.manchester.ac.uk...

Explain how similar if one fire actively and sucessfully fought and other
abandoned?


reply posted on 22-11-2009 @ 09:01 PM by thedman
reply to post by EvilAxis



While details are sparse can see some similarly to 1990 Meridian Plaza fire
in Philadelphia.

FD in both cases suffered from low water pressure - in Meridian Plaza
restrictor valves in standpipes were set incorectly. Talked to Philadephia
fireman who was there.

What is unknown is framing of Caracas tower (or more correctly Parque
Tower East - there are 2 ). Is a conventional steel frame or more exotic
design like WTC 7 which had long span cantilever truss to support structure over Con Edison sub station.

Also what was fire load in building? Questions like this effect resistance
to fire.

Truthers often take any building fire and scream "See it didn't collapse
like WTC .....!" without considering other factors


en.wikipedia.org...


reply posted on 22-11-2009 @ 09:19 PM by ExPostFacto
reply to post by hooper



Your explanation sounds logical, expect that only one side of the building was damaged. Any structural failure would collapse toward the damaged section...not systematically crumble nearly evenly throughout the entire structure. Can you explain the questions against the OS that go against the theory that there was structural damage so the whole building imploded more or less?



reply posted on 23-11-2009 @ 04:23 AM by Koka
reply to post by ExPostFacto



Don't expect an answer too soon, I've asked hooper to explain the symmetrical collapse on two threads now, and have yet to receive an answer.

In fact I have yet to hear a valid explanation from anyone as to how this could occur.


reply posted on 23-11-2009 @ 11:59 AM by Alfie1
Originally posted by corvin77
I browsed this thread and didnt see it, so apologies if this has been mentioned.

The bbc also spoke of the collapse 20 mins before it did, hope my video embedding works...



corvin 77

I don't know what your take is on this because you don't say. But it never ceases to amaze me that some people keep bringing it up as something sinister and evidence of an inside job.

The BBC say that on a dramatic and confusing day, when the collapse of WTC 7 had been expected for hours, they passed on an incorrect report from Reuters that the collapse had already happened.

What is the alternative ? That the perpetrators of this inside job, who would all face the hangman or the firing squad if the truth got out, decided it would be a good idea to forewarn a foreign news outlet of what was planned. Why ???

Anyone who goes for the second alternative presumably also believes the BBC is " in on it "
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 14 days ago with 14 member flags
9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 7 days ago with 13 member flags
Wikipedia categorizes 9/11 truth as \'denialism\'
  Posted 18 days ago with 11 member flags
Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 14 days ago with 6 member flags
new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 8 days ago with 6 member flags
you must try this youre self ????
  Posted 14 days ago with 4 member flags