FIVE QUESTIONS: The Twin Towers and a Controlled Demonlition: HOW?

Originally posted by Kester
Everyone who has been through complex investigations knows it can all be turned on its head by one fresh piece of information. What happens to your beliefs then?

Any news from Kurt Sonnenfeld?

I'm twiddling my thumbs waiting for thousands of pictures of columns showing a distinctive, highly specific, forensically known high explosive shattering pattern. I've seen a few weird pics, but that simply can't be all there is, given the tremendous vista of highly specific, targeted, horizontally projected column destruction a top-down full blown demolition overkill would achieve.

Hook me up man.

Originally posted by vipertech0596
To recap.

(...)

2. We have airline personnel who identified said hijackers as men they had checked/cleared to board those flights.

Great... names?

Originally posted by vipertech0596
3. We have computer records showing how the tickets were purchased.

Okay, which records... where?

Originally posted by vipertech0596
4. We have records tying the hijackers together

Could you be specific? I know of some, but I can always use more sources.

Originally posted by vipertech0596
5. We have evidence connecting each, and every one of the hijackers, to a terrorist organization headed by Osama Bin Laden.

Okay... I agree... but what specific sources would you cite to support this specific claim? If you elect to cite the 9/11 Commission Report, don't cite it as a whole, cite a specific footnote.

Originally posted by vipertech0596
6. We have members of said organization in custody who have "spilled the beans" on the operation.

"Confessions" from brutal torture by American cowards is out. I think you would rather prefer the KSM - Yosri Fouda interview. Correct? You wouldn't want to rely on fascist torture practices for "justice", would you? You do realize that before it became known that the "land of the free and the home of the brave" engaged in torture, the torture techniques employed were known as torture, but from then on, the fawning corporate media redefined torture as "enhanced interrogation techniques", a wonderful euphemistic neologism? Right?

Originally posted by vipertech0596
7. We had a President, who treated terrorism as an act of war, not the law enforcement issue the previous President had treated it as.

When did Congress formally declare war? To which country? Help me out here...cite credible sources to prove your point. Make sure you bring up the Geneva convention, too. I'm thrilled to be able to understand international law through the lens of a ruthless imperialist.

Originally posted by vipertech0596
8. We had a President who warned the world that if you trained/harbored/supported terrorists who meant/had did the US harm, we were going to come knocking on your door.

Yeah... brilliant, wasn't it? So many doors to knock, so little time. Those WMDs gotta be somewhere!



Tell us another chestnut George!

Originally posted by vipertech0596
9. Afghanistan was harboring Al Qaeda, Iraq was harboring a bunch of other terrorists on our hit lists...including some members of Al Qaeda who fled Afghanistan and ended up in Iraq. Now, I could bring up that certain Al Qaeda affiliated terrorists were listed in Iraqi government records....but why muddy the waters......

Cite sources.

Originally posted by vipertech0596
We went to war.

And you lost. Until somebody in the White House decided it was time to focus on Bin Laden again. Unfortunately he murdered him, instead of capturing the criminal and bringing him to trial. Justice exists only in theory in the "land of the free and the home of the brave".

Originally posted by vipertech0596
Oh yes....
10. Someone reading the above post will try to reply that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

Like this guy?



Iraq had absolutely NOTHING to do with 9/11. Here's what happened when 27-year CIA veteran Ray McGovern confronted SecDef Donald Rumsfeld, serial liar and war criminal.



"There are known knowns, unknown knowns, known unknowns, and then of course, there are unknown unknowns"

-- Donald Rumsfeld

"There are some people who lie and get away with it"

-- Donald Rumsfeld

Originally posted by snowcrash911

Originally posted by Kester
Everyone who has been through complex investigations knows it can all be turned on its head by one fresh piece of information. What happens to your beliefs then?

Any news from Kurt Sonnenfeld?

I'm twiddling my thumbs waiting for thousands of pictures of columns showing a distinctive, highly specific, forensically known high explosive shattering pattern. I've seen a few weird pics, but that simply can't be all there is, given the tremendous vista of highly specific, targeted, horizontally projected column destruction a top-down full blown demolition overkill would achieve.

Hook me up man.

edit on 17-12-2011 by snowcrash911 because: (no reason given)

The physical evidence is far more valuable than thousands of pictures. There's around a million tons of physical evidence on the Fresh Kills Landfill on Staten Island. The 'fines' are thought to contain the missing human remains. Instead of being taken to a respectful place as the families were told would happen the fines were bulldozed over the rest of the debris. I suggest an Occupation of the Fresh Kills Landfill. The physical evidence to be dug up with the oversight of wtcfamiliesforproperburial. Samples of this evidence to be sent to independent experts around the world. Remember NIST haven't tested for explosives. It's about time somebody did. All this fruitless discussion about words and pictures can be put to rest with an efficient investigation that studies the nature of the physical evidence.
I would be interested to hear why anyone would object to this and who exactly would offer any objection.

Originally posted by Kester
The physical evidence is far more valuable than thousands of pictures. There's around a million tons of physical evidence on the Fresh Kills Landfill on Staten Island. The 'fines' are thought to contain the missing human remains. Instead of being taken to a respectful place as the families were told would happen the fines were bulldozed over the rest of the debris. I suggest an Occupation of the Fresh Kills Landfill. The physical evidence to be dug up with the oversight of wtcfamiliesforproperburial. Samples of this evidence to be sent to independent experts around the world. Remember NIST haven't tested for explosives. It's about time somebody did. All this fruitless discussion about words and pictures can be put to rest with an efficient investigation that studies the nature of the physical evidence.
I would be interested to hear why anyone would object to this and who exactly would offer any objection.

So your bottom line is that even though there is no evidence for any sort of demolitions you are sure that the landfill will contain some physical evidence if we dig it up. Your way out of this corner you have talked yourself into is that when we don't find evidence of demolitions by digging it will be because we haven't dug deep enough or that the plotters are covering up all evidence as it is discovered.
Before we dig, it would be good to know what we might find, according to your well-thought-out theory. As the proponent of this theory of demolitions, perhaps you can enlighten us as to where the charges were placed, how many were placed, what type [blast, linear shaped charge, etc.], and how big they were. They will have to clear each floor in less than 200 milliseconds, on average, so there should be a large number, maybe one or two per floor truss.

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by Kester
The physical evidence is far more valuable than thousands of pictures. There's around a million tons of physical evidence on the Fresh Kills Landfill on Staten Island. The 'fines' are thought to contain the missing human remains. Instead of being taken to a respectful place as the families were told would happen the fines were bulldozed over the rest of the debris. I suggest an Occupation of the Fresh Kills Landfill. The physical evidence to be dug up with the oversight of wtcfamiliesforproperburial. Samples of this evidence to be sent to independent experts around the world. Remember NIST haven't tested for explosives. It's about time somebody did. All this fruitless discussion about words and pictures can be put to rest with an efficient investigation that studies the nature of the physical evidence.
I would be interested to hear why anyone would object to this and who exactly would offer any objection.

So your bottom line is that even though there is no evidence for any sort of demolitions you are sure that the landfill will contain some physical evidence if we dig it up. Your way out of this corner you have talked yourself into is that when we don't find evidence of demolitions by digging it will be because we haven't dug deep enough or that the plotters are covering up all evidence as it is discovered.
Before we dig, it would be good to know what we might find, according to your well-thought-out theory. As the proponent of this theory of demolitions, perhaps you can enlighten us as to where the charges were placed, how many were placed, what type [blast, linear shaped charge, etc.], and how big they were. They will have to clear each floor in less than 200 milliseconds, on average, so there should be a large number, maybe one or two per floor truss.

Thank you for calling my suggestion "well-thought-out".
The photographic and video evidence of the rapid transformation of the buildings into huge dust clouds and debris is evidence of demolition. That's why NIST don't want to concentrate on this enormous source of information. The debris is the physical evidence. The average particle size of the debris is an indicator of the forces applied during the few seconds the transformation took. Explosive residues and other materials are evidence indicating some of the destructive methods used. Allegedly the debris is 15 to 20 feet deep and covers an area of around 40 acres. If this is true digging deep enough won't be a problem. All of the debris is the evidence, it can't be covered up by 'plotters' as it is uncovered.
What we will find is the well documented debris most of which was searched for human remains and personal effects. NIST did not test the steel for explosive residues. For some reason they don't mention the possibility of testing the rest of the debris for residues. Testing would appear to be an obvious step.
You sound familiar with demolition charges. That's a big disadvantage for you when investigating an unconventional demolition.
I have to emphasise the need to cooperate with wtcfamiliesforproperburial during this dig.

reply to post by Kester


NIST did not have to test for explosives. That is not its job. It's job is to find out how it collapsed and how to prevent that in the future. It did that with the rebuild of WTC 7 and the new Freedom Tower. There is no need to test for explosives because 1000's of people saw, heard, and videoed 2 plans striking the towers. There is your initiating event. I still think to this day that the designers of the towers did their jobs. The terrorists were trying to knock one tower into another(just like 93) and they had two shots. Did not happen. There would have been 15-20 thousand dead easily.

Now,when there is a suicide bombing, there are pieces remaining... most of them. One man. One detonator. You will find the parts. This is how they track terrorists and the their signature. So, if one man can blow himself up, you mean to tell me you CD 3 buildings, 2 over 100 stories, and there is nothing? You do not need to search the landfill, it was done by PENTBOMB. The FBI found no traces of explosives and were onsite 'prior' to the collapse. AFter the collapse, during the search for survivors, bomb dogs were also used and there were NO hits. This is all documented.

You can theorize and suggest whatever you want but the bottom line is that there was no CD and there is no evidence. No residue. No triggers. No wires.Nothing...

Originally posted by pteridine

...perhaps you can enlighten us as to where the charges were placed, how many were placed, what type [blast, linear shaped charge, etc.], and how big they were. They will have to clear each floor in less than 200 milliseconds, on average, so there should be a large number, maybe one or two per floor truss.

Correct me where I'm wrong...

You think the buildings fell in 14 seconds WITHOUT any help whatsoever from demolition techniques.
Meaning - Total global collapse required no help. Twice.

Then WHY would you suggest there would have to be 1000's upon 1000's of demolition charges needed for total collapse?
Why do all of you OS believers run from that question every time I ask it?

YOU CAN'T FRIGGING HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.
If NO HELP worked with ease TWICE, help from devices would be EASIER!!!

Someone please tell me where I am wrong here.

The planes were remote controlled, evidenced by the fact that the cabin doors were never opened during the flight of at least one plane (black box evidence), 'hijacked' codes were never punched in by the pilots, etc. No Arab names were on the initial list of the flight manifest. Whether any hijackers ever even existed is questionable, even as patsies. Bin Laden was a convenient boogie man who had nothing to do with this particular operation.

Military grade thermate was used to cut the heaviest support beams in the basement and lower floor areas.

Backpack nukes, sized to provide enough destructive power to destroy/turn to dust just enough mass to take the building down but not harm nearby areas, and with a limited radiation signature, were placed on every other floor and detonated by remote control. They were easily quickly placed by Mossad agents acting as service personnel (the 'Acme elevator repair' staff that never existed as a real company).

Building 7, which was Spook Central, was destroyed in the same manner to hide the control rooms for the operation, as well as conveniently destroy files of several ongoing SEC investigations, etc.

Proof: EMP effect close in to the buildings reported by persons who barely outran the pyroclastic dust clouds; strangely burning cars bursting into flames, the metal engine blocks burning but the gas tanks untouched, the heat of the dust cloud (a gravity collapse dust cloud would not have been hot), the micron-sized dustification of most of the building contents, and the fact that the majority of the steel in the building was not accounted for when the beams were loaded up and shipped out; according to FEMA's records, less than half of the original steel tonnage comprising the buildings was carted out. The rest of it floated away as melted and reconstituted spherules in the dust. No amount of gravity pancake collapse, kerosene burning, or thermate accounts for the metal spherules; only a nuclear weapon can create that much heat, that quickly. BTW, thermate has an approximate 1:1 ratio; the buildings would have had to be loaded with as much thermate by weight as the buildings weighed themselves...an obvious impossibility.

Higher than normal radiation signature in lower Manhattan in the days after 9-11; accounted for, when mentioned at all, in the MSM by 'medical waste' and residue of exit signs in the building; neither of which really accounts for it. People have been arrested at Ground Zero (heh) for having Geiger counters on site and even experts brought in to test the air quality did not check for radiation. Seems like it would have been normal precaution and simple enough to do.

The biggest evidence: The ongoing sustained high heat in the basements of all three buildings. Only residual nuclear fission can account for this (a small China syndrome effect). The 'fires' were not declared out for over four months and were hot enough to melt soles of boots and as metal beams were removed from the pile and exposed to oxygen, they burst in flame. How hot must a huge construction beam be, to BURN when suddenly exposed to oxygen? How is this possibly explained by a kerosene based fire months beforehand? Firefighters on scene describe molten metal 'running like in a foundry' in the basement areas of all three buildings. Nothing but residual fission can possibly explain this level of sustained intense heat.

Hundreds of tonnes of radiation absorbing foam (called 'heat absorbing' by the media, but why would the heat even be there, surely not from residual fires from 80+ stories above?) was ordered and spread on the pile. The steel was quickly removed not so much as to remove evidence, but because it was radioactive. Again, Geiger counters were not allowed on the pile and people were arrested for bringing them into the area. Little known fact, but findable with enough research.

People, the trouble is that if even one aspect of the 'Official Story' can be disproved or brought into question (the air is safe to breathe??? Please, laughable to anyone with half a brain!) then everything they say is a story and nothing more.

And yes, the missing gold is a big part of this. See Benjamin Fulford's current threads for more on this. I have wondered myself if he was for real, but he just ties together too many loose ends and it makes sense of things that never previously did. He's either the world's greatest fiction writer, or the real deal.

Originally posted by Kester

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by Kester
The physical evidence is far more valuable than thousands of pictures. There's around a million tons of physical evidence on the Fresh Kills Landfill on Staten Island. The 'fines' are thought to contain the missing human remains. Instead of being taken to a respectful place as the families were told would happen the fines were bulldozed over the rest of the debris. I suggest an Occupation of the Fresh Kills Landfill. The physical evidence to be dug up with the oversight of wtcfamiliesforproperburial. Samples of this evidence to be sent to independent experts around the world. Remember NIST haven't tested for explosives. It's about time somebody did. All this fruitless discussion about words and pictures can be put to rest with an efficient investigation that studies the nature of the physical evidence.
I would be interested to hear why anyone would object to this and who exactly would offer any objection.

So your bottom line is that even though there is no evidence for any sort of demolitions you are sure that the landfill will contain some physical evidence if we dig it up. Your way out of this corner you have talked yourself into is that when we don't find evidence of demolitions by digging it will be because we haven't dug deep enough or that the plotters are covering up all evidence as it is discovered.
Before we dig, it would be good to know what we might find, according to your well-thought-out theory. As the proponent of this theory of demolitions, perhaps you can enlighten us as to where the charges were placed, how many were placed, what type [blast, linear shaped charge, etc.], and how big they were. They will have to clear each floor in less than 200 milliseconds, on average, so there should be a large number, maybe one or two per floor truss.

Thank you for calling my suggestion "well-thought-out".
The photographic and video evidence of the rapid transformation of the buildings into huge dust clouds and debris is evidence of demolition. That's why NIST don't want to concentrate on this enormous source of information. The debris is the physical evidence. The average particle size of the debris is an indicator of the forces applied during the few seconds the transformation took. Explosive residues and other materials are evidence indicating some of the destructive methods used. Allegedly the debris is 15 to 20 feet deep and covers an area of around 40 acres. If this is true digging deep enough won't be a problem. All of the debris is the evidence, it can't be covered up by 'plotters' as it is uncovered.
What we will find is the well documented debris most of which was searched for human remains and personal effects. NIST did not test the steel for explosive residues. For some reason they don't mention the possibility of testing the rest of the debris for residues. Testing would appear to be an obvious step.
You sound familiar with demolition charges. That's a big disadvantage for you when investigating an unconventional demolition.
I have to emphasise the need to cooperate with wtcfamiliesforproperburial during this dig.

I called it "well-thought-out" because I was certain that you had determined the characteristics and locations of the explosives before you posted you theory. Not to do so would put you in the class of the "it-just-didn't-look-right-so-it-must-be-demolition" technical fools who promulgate nonsensical theories without any thought of the details.
I ask you again to enlighten us as to where the charges were placed, how many were placed, what type [blast, linear shaped charge, etc.], and how big they were. Remember that they will have to clear each floor in less than 200 milliseconds, on average.

Originally posted by Wizayne

Originally posted by pteridine

...perhaps you can enlighten us as to where the charges were placed, how many were placed, what type [blast, linear shaped charge, etc.], and how big they were. They will have to clear each floor in less than 200 milliseconds, on average, so there should be a large number, maybe one or two per floor truss.

Correct me where I'm wrong...

You think the buildings fell in 14 seconds WITHOUT any help whatsoever from demolition techniques.
Meaning - Total global collapse required no help. Twice.

Then WHY would you suggest there would have to be 1000's upon 1000's of demolition charges needed for total collapse?
Why do all of you OS believers run from that question every time I ask it?

YOU CAN'T FRIGGING HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.
If NO HELP worked with ease TWICE, help from devices would be EASIER!!!

Someone please tell me where I am wrong here.

I certainly think that the collapse was due to thermal failure of the structure remaining after aircraft impact. This was due to the design of the building and the construction materials used as fireproofing.
In exploring a theory, it is a good idea to determine if the proponent of that theory had any idea what he or she was talking about. This is usually done by asking for details. So far, we have seen internet whiz kids and grumpy old men mindlessy repeating what they read on various entreprenurial conspiracy sites with no idea of the processes or demolition materials involved.
You are welcome to propose the type, quantity, and location of explosive charges necessary to bring down the building in 10-15 seconds.

reply to post by signalfire


No evidence of nukes has been found. I tried to discuss this with a Russian who said that if I questioned his theory, I was wrong and he wouldn't debate the issue. My conclusion was that he had spent too much time with the Soviet patron, St. Vodka.
No EMP was noted. The buildings colllapsed from the top down. The thermal, blast, and radiation signatures of a nuclear weapon were not noted. Residual radiation was not present, nor were fission isotopes found.

reply to post by signalfire

Nukes?

You really think that nuclear weapons were detonated in NYC on 9/11?

reply to post by signalfire


Gosh....this is ALL totally wrong from the beginning, right out of the starting gate!!:

The planes were remote controlled, evidenced by the fact that the cabin doors were never opened during the flight of at least one plane (black box evidence)....

Totally false, and still (I presume) being perpetuated by a certain other website (even though the FACTS are well known to them). This refers ONLY to American 77, and its FDR. The FACT is, the data that records the door status is an option, and was not installed at that time, on that airplane. The coding, therefore, was "null" which read as "closed". The mere ridiculousness of it is staggering, and it's amazing that this still has any traction on the Internet.....

.... 'hijacked' codes were never punched in by the pilots, etc.

This is more of the silliness that is promulgated out there.....from people who have no idea what they're talking about!!

When you are a pilot, seated and seat-belted in, and a raving maniac (or two) burst through the door that has just been opened by a Flight Attendant, strong-arming her and then attacking you from behind, most likely slitting your throat with the razor box cutters......you are fighting them off, not worrying about changing the transponder. The "hijack"four-digit code is only for a COVERT message to Air Traffic Control.

No Arab names were on the initial list of the flight manifest.

That is another of the many, many Internet lies that continue to circulate.

The numbers of false claims are staggering in their inanity.......

Originally posted by ProudBird

The numbers of false claims are staggering in their inanity.......

But that is all "truthers" have, false claims and lies.

It appears no matter how many times truthers claims are shown to be false, they just keep repeating them, even though they know that they are just lies.

One wonders why?

reply to post by signalfire

EMP effect close in to the buildings reported by persons who barely outran the pyroclastic dust clouds; strangely burning cars bursting into flames, the metal engine blocks burning but the gas tanks untouched, the heat of the dust cloud (a gravity collapse dust cloud would not have been hot),

You mean like this.....



Notice car is on fire before buildings collapse

Here is video of burning cars

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by signalfire

Backpack nukes, sized to provide enough destructive power to destroy/turn to dust just enough mass to take the building down but not harm nearby areas, and with a limited radiation signature, were placed on every other floor and detonated by remote control. They were easily quickly placed by Mossad agents acting as service personnel (the 'Acme elevator repair' staff that never existed as a real company).

What limited radiation signature is thet?

Since the smallest nuclear weapon deployed, the W54 for the Davy Crockett recoiless rifle had a yield of either
10 or 20 tones nominal

The radiation from these warheads had a lethal (500 rem) radius of 350 meters (10 ton) or 400 meter (20 ton)

Now explain where were all those radiation casualties? Consider that in the North Tower there were 14 people
trapped in stairwell who escaped unharmed, 2 more "rode the pile " and were found injured in the rubble

Again no radiation injury from someone in the center of the collapse

reply to post by signalfire

Higher than normal radiation signature in lower Manhattan in the days after 9-11; accounted for, when mentioned at all, in the MSM by 'medical waste' and residue of exit signs in the building; neither of which really accounts for it. People have been arrested at Ground Zero (heh) for having Geiger counters on site and even experts brought in to test the air quality did not check for radiation. Seems like it would have been normal precaution and simple enough to do.

Lie

A health inspector from NY Department of Health was present on site - he measured no radiation, before,
during, or after the collapse . He was equipped with extremely sensative instruments - none of which picked
up radiation

Within minutes of the crash, McKinney sent a radiological health inspector to check the site for any radiation sources. He reached Richard Borri, a senior scientist in the department’s office of Radiological Health, who like most people from DOH, was on his way to work when the first tower was hit.

Borri checked the World Trade Center site for signs of radiation before and after the collapse of the buildings. Radiation could have originated in industrial radiology sources, such as the installing beams of the huge office buildings, which may have contained some radioactive elements from x-rays taken, and from depleted uranium used in ballasts in aircraft wing tips (such counterweights in airplane wing tips give the most weight for least volume, says Borri). It might also be left from any medical or dental offices.

The far more serious threat, of course, was the chance that one of the hijackers might have carried a suitcase of radioactive materials or a dirty bomb, a conventional bomb spiked with radioactive material. Such a bomb has been compared to TNT, strapped to a container of plutonium or plutonium-contaminated waste. This kind of a device would not produce a nuclear explosion, but it could spread deadly radioactive matter across a swath of city.
.

Although Borri didn’t turn up any problematic radioactive readings by the end of the day, his work would be supplemented by the federal Department of Energy, whose technicians remained on site and continued to sample. [Only during the last days of the Ground Zero cleanup would radioactive testers find any evidence of radioactive emissions, from a pharmacy laboratory located within one of the buildings.]

In addition The FDNY Haz Mat Team checked the site, as did the EPA and several other agencies

None found any radiation - with the exception noted

Originally posted by thedman


Notice car is on fire before buildings collapse

Why do you think that is unusual? Why do you ignore the jet fuel in the aircraft that caused that fire?

Here is video of burning cars

As explained on that page, caused by jet fuel....

I still don't get how people can't get back to basics. Has anyone on this web site, ever weld before??? Anyone??? To get metal to distort, or start to loose its stability, you need a constant, direct flame. Let's get the key word here, CONSTANT. Not a flash, not a puff of flame, not an explosion of fuel. A CONSTANT DIRECTED FLAME. Did you see the same airplanes as I saw? No explosives were detonated when the planes hit. And lets say the bldg was wired from the 30th to the 90th. That gives alot of room for error. You'd expect to have some of the explosives to be knocked out, with 60 floors pre-wired, and an incoming plane to start the damage, how easy do you need it???? There is no mechanical or physidal way possible, for a bldg to pancake at free fall speed. 3rd question, they amount of explosives needed would have been enormous. Wrong. Thermite placed at the right spots, the bldg would have done most of the work,.4 th doesn't get a reply. 5th, you've just had a plane hit a huge bldg, with pre cut structural, and strategically placed thermite, and compact explosives, and I will say it again, the bldg would have done most of the work. It was a win win situation, for who ever wanted this brought on. The obvious is sitting right infront of your face, face the simple facts, To much energy is being spent on analyzing this whole thing. Keep it simple stupid. And, you really expect me to believe that these planes were hijacked with box cutters? REALLY???? Box cutters, what, at the most if I got cut, 1/2 inch deep. And I am about to die, a 1/2 inch cut is all that is stopping me from dying. Really??? Wake the F*#K up people. Seriously, go get a 1/2 inch thick piece of steel, get some map gas, ( it burns way hotter than jet fuel) and see how long it takes you to even get the piece of steel to distort. And see how long you have to hold that flame on one spot, remember, when the plane exploded, so did all the fuel, no more sustainable heat source. Really, box cutters???????????

reply to post by Hurst22


It's not about just distortion, it's about reduction in load capacity. You are ignoring the gravity loads on the columns in question.



Strength of steel at elevated temperatures (Lie 1992).

The core columns had a FOS of approximately 1.8.

Why do you think steel columns are fireproofed? For decoration?

With respect to thermite, sure, hypothesize away, but be sure to acknowledge the above, too.