Originally posted by gconran
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
There is a concerted effort going on to build and analyze fire and how it affects structures still. This particular lab is still being contructed at NIST for precisely that purpose (and others). First of it's kind. Funded by taxpayer money:
Perhaps this will help identify and answer some questions on how fire and stress plays a role in multi story buildings.
Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever
Originally posted by greenCo
Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever
This is just my opinion so don't be bashing, but I made up a few pictures depicting why I think the WTC buildings collapsed (basically leaning to towards the "official" story as it's put lol).
The collapse starts at 3 seconds into the video, and the building stops becoming visible at around 12 or 13 seconds into the video (9 seconds) , however just like stated above, there are MANY floors below which are unaccounted for in the fall, which brings my collapse time to around 14 seconds (14-18 seconds including all the debris that fell).
In conclusion, I 100% believe that controlled demolition was not needed to bring down the towers.edit on 18-6-2011 by SkepticAndBeliever because: (no reason given)
There is a little thing in physics called "resistance" , and believe me... there is no resistance at all in the way this buildings are collapsing. They simply blow out all the structural resistance of the buidings.
Of course there is resistance, the debri of the columns is coming down way faster than the building is in all the videos, plus teh building came down in at least 14 seconds, no resistance woudl have made the building fall at 8 seconds. Nice try though
Originally posted by Qwenn
Building 7 IS an important part of the puzzle.
You need to ask yourself a few simple questions about that building.
1) It didn't seem that badly damaged at all
2) The fire crew clearing everybody away saying that the building was being brought down soon, not to mention all of the explosions heard in there.
3) Most importantly the news report about building 7 has collapsed, she then went on to read a lengthy script explaining the collapse etc in detail, BUT building 7 was still clearly visible as fine behind her shoulder.
4) Finally it was emphasised on the tv in an interview with the guy who said he made the decision to have the building PULLED. That was a highly sensitive building with some very important stuff inside, including the accounts of all of the missing billions of dollars. Also it would have taken days, if not weeks to rig the building to fall.
How can we believe any of the other stupid lies, when they blatantly lie about this simpler building.
Originally posted by Kingbreaker
I don't know about building 7, its been a LONG time since I've reviewed this, but its already been proven that thermite couldn't do the job. first its explosives, then its thermite. even with 75 Ibs of thermite placed next to a column, all it did was blacken it. and there was no way to put enough of the "invisible gel thermite" on there either.
most demolitions now rely on basically a metal blade fixed explosives to shear through support columns.
but like i've stated before, your talking about thousands and thousands of people ranging from civilians, airport personnel, etc to be involved with this.
and also your dealing with human nature in regards to garnishing attention
Originally posted by tbonethedstroyer
Total Fail. Nice try OP.
Originally posted by filosophia
Basically it looks like your theory is saying that "All this weight" is what caused the tower to collapse, but towers are build to hold up All that weight" so if anything the top would fall off but not the bottom. At a certain point it wouldn't make sense for "all this weight" to knock the tower down when the tower is designed to hold up all that weight. You'd have to believe that every steel girdle buckled under the pressure of "all this weight" and yet you'd have to believe this did not happen for about an hour after the plane impacted (and seven hours for WTC 7).