Originally posted by ohhwataloser
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
C)A ccording to NIST, the fires caused column 79 to overheat and expand, and becuase the steel was vertical and couldn't expand up or down, it expanded sideways, pushing the horizontal girder between columns 79 and 44 and causing floor 13 to collapse. The NIST report go into all of that so I'm not going to waste my time repeating it here to satisfy this weird little game playing of yours.
so thats what caused wtc 7 to come down? hmmm.... now my first question is why wouldn't the steel expand inward, instead of outward against the girders which would obviously have more resistance but we can ignore that
also how much did the steel expand?
lets assume worst case, I couldn't find any info on how thick the steel was for wtc 7, but wtc 1 and 2 used 5 inch thick steal for their columns at the base, which would be way over kill for wtc 7 at floor 13, but lets just use 5 inches.
how much did the steel get heated? I have no idea but, lets assume the steel is normally at zero degrees why not? and it got heated to 2500 degrees which would melt it, but lets just use some numbers
0.00000645in*in*deg F - forumla for steel expansion
0.00000645in*5*2500F = 0.080625 n. which obviously it would of been alot less.
so .08in was enough to cause a grider to fail?
or are we going to assume that the entire column expanded in the direction of column 44 and in no other direction? biggest column I could find is again from wtc1 and 2 so would be way oversized for wtc 7, is 52inx22in. so ill assume the same thing as above and that all 52 inches expanded in the direction of column 44.
0.00000645in*52*2500F = 0.8385 so even at an impossible amount of expansion, you think less than an inch caused a grider to fail? and mind you the amont of expansion would obviously be alot less.
Does this guy know anything about 1,200 plus architects and engineers saying is was an inside job?
Originally posted by Nonchalant
reply to post by GoldenFleece
haha excellent work GF...so now we got a devil-worshipper telling us to just accept the official story of 9/11 and move on..
Originally posted by nh_ee
If the US hadn't instantly become involved in not one, but two wars, against an adversary residing in countries very wealthy in Natural Resources, with nary a standing army or single plane or Ship in which to fight against I personally would feel totally different about 9/11.
If people can be paid to kill one another, How difficult would it be to pay some crazies to fly into buildings anyway ?
Especially if by using brainwashing ala MK ULTRA they would do it for FREE ?
Think outside of the box and look at the bigger picture my friend.
The Truth Shall Set You Free.
Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by GoldenFleece
Ah and what exactly is the offical story? Have you truthers ever made a consensus on that yet? As far as I know the only offical story is that radical Islam terrorists hijacked 4 airliners, smashing three into buildings and a fourth going down into a field. Two buildings collapsed from the resulting damage and fires together, while a third collapsed as collateral from damage and fires which were unchallenged for hours after the collapses.
Why has no one involved in this mass destruction come forward publically to support the truthers and say they helped plan and carry it out?