a reply to: wmd_2008
Not really as you should well know high rise building flex with just wind load
we do not see it "flexing"....we see it moving as one.....and is does so as soon as there is movement. two direction at the same time.
if it is "flexing" the entire building is absorbing it....and I'll be damned if you can see that action by walking by it.
THOUSANDS of tons of concrete and steel above the impact point far GREATER than wind load,
and MUCH lighter than the mass it is GOING THROUGH!
more steel weight between subbasement 6 and the 5th floor than in ALL the floors over the damage....that is how skyscrapers are built....they also
taper to the top using lighter weight steel and a lighter gypsum mix for the floor.
the steel could bend due to failure of steelwork putting increased load on other parts of the structure.
do you know the purpose of lateral, cross, and diagonal bracing???
for every ONE direction of pull, there are multiple angles resisting that pull......the beauty of redundancy.
I mean WTC 2 was hit second lower down
and DIFFERENT asymmetrical damage than WTC1, the impact all but missed the core yet we see the SAME characteristics...don't we....from different
damage at different heights with different loads above......SAME exact result.
no stopping and starting of the collapses through the observable mechanics of collapse, once initiated the collapses were non-stop, symmetrical, and
and people can't understand why the building ripped itself apart?
"No conclusive evidence was found to indicate that pre-collapse fires were sever enough to have a significant effect on the microstructure that would
have resulted in weakening of the steel structure." NIST NCSTAR 1-3C, p. 235
no evidence the type of joining methods, materials, or welding procedures used was improper NIST 1-3 p.99
recovered bolts were stronger than typical. NIST 1-2 p.133
"no core column examined showed temp. above 250C" NIST 1-3 6.6.2
NCSTAR1-3 7.7.2 "because no steel was recovered from WTC7,it is not possable to make any statements about it's quality"
"NIST did not test for the residue from explosives or accelerants" wtc. nist. gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006. htm
funny that not ONE duhbunker can point to the NIST report for the 'representation' of high temp WTC steel that failed from these FIRES PRESENT to
give direction to a LATTER hypothesis crew it did, they would rather point to a 'DISCLAIMER' inserted AFTER the science telling NOT to pay attention
to the found science???[shakes head]....they also point to duhbunking sites that ....'tell'...us all what the reports 'really' mean...huh.
oh yea...they also do point to a NEW cover-sheet listing the NIST volumes and a preface page that wasn't not in the original 2005 NIST reports....
they point to that paragraph that states the reports show how "fire and impacts fell these buildings on 9-11"....lol...what a LIE....there is
NOTHING within the 10,000+ pages that scientifically shows that.
as I just posted above...but YOU are more than welcome to provide ANY data from that report that supports the bull you spew here.
The simple FACT is no one fully knows or ever will
oh this is 'plane' as day!
and just to let you in on a little secret.....PROVING fire did this as is PUSHED AS TRUTH...will automatically nullify all other claims....WOW!!!!
ENTER the 2008 NIST hypothesis crew....
Shyam Sunder at the 2008 NIST technical briefing
"the phenomenon that we saw on 9/11 that brought this particular building down was really thermal expansion, which occurs at lower
so....after three years of STALLING......and NOT finding ANY representation of high temp steel....they go in the other direction...
and state a brand new never before seen physics phenomenon is responsible....that ONLY occurred on 9-11.
new science they refuse to validate, verify, PEER REVIEW through science.
read the transcript along with that video...the first quote I posted above is on page 34......wanna hear something else the illustrious Shyam Sunder
says at that tech briefing and is located on page 16???...lol...this is priceless.
"free fall acceleration can ONLY occur when there is NO STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS BELOW IT"
remember, this tech briefing was from in between the rough draft they released for two weeks and the final report that came out two months later in
Nov. when they were still TRYING to hide the found 105 vertical feet of acceleration equal to gravity that occurred within the first 1/3 of it's 6.5
NCSTAR 1A 3.6] "This free fall drop continues for approximately 8 stories, the distance traveled between t=1.75s and t=4.0s...constant, downward
acceleration during this time interval. This acceleration was *9.8m/s^2*, equivalent to the acceleration of gravity."
NICSTAR 1A 4.3.4] Global Collapse..."The entire building above the buckled column region moved downward in a single unit, as observed, completing the
"the damage from the debris from WTC 1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of WTC 7."
science TELLS us what MUST occur......a clear path is needed to attain zero resistance.
tell me how fire at one end of the building does all that work before 1.74 seconds of the collapse?