Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Free Fall thread

13567…12

Comments

  • #102
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,323 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Plasco was in Iran- one of the worst places on earth for maintaining building standards. They made it of concrete and steel, no fireproofing, the Iranians declared the building unsafe before the collapse. Gas canisters were stored inside the building ( temps above normal) plus it collapsed with four corners toppling inwards (another clue its natural)
    Lol goalpost moving.

    "No steel framed buildings have collapsed due to fire. The ones that did don't count."


  • #103
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Plasco was in Iran- one of the worst places on earth for maintaining building standards. They made it of concrete and steel, no fireproofing, the Iranians declared the building unsafe before the collapse. Gas canisters were stored inside the building ( temps above normal) plus it collapsed with four corners toppling inwards (another clue its natural)

    And the WTC did have fireproofing

    Which was rated for 2~3 hours depending on which fire proofing feature you want to call attention to.

    But the fires raged for about 7+ hours. And no firefighting happened. And the sprinkler systems were disabled.

    Plasco fire was 3.5 hours between outbreak and collapse. And they had firefighters actively trying to put it out. As you say, no fire proofing.


  • #104
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    I disagree- there no evidence. Even they can be dogmatic, just like the debunkers.

    You agree there is no evidence of an inside job?


  • #105
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Overheal wrote: »
    Yes the facade fell without impedance for about 2 and a quarter seconds. This is because the interior of the structure had already fallen apart.

    This is their model- no free fall. You see it at one minute 15 seconds! notice that half still there below (crumbling and twisting) That buckling of floors and columns still taking place even when the building falling on the right side. NIST lied in their second revised report.


  • #106
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,189 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    This fire..

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbiPWmPx_zU


    and

    "Loud bangs coming from inside former Bethlehem Steel plant"
    https://buffalonews.com/2016/11/09/fire-engulfs-building-former-bethlehem-steel-plant-lackawanna/

    Someone reported hearing loud bangs, inside a burning building, must be an inside job


  • #107
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    This is their model- no free fall. You see it at one minute 15 seconds! notice that half still there below (crumbling and twisting) That buckling of floors and columns still taking place even when the building falling.

    Yes I've labored the point before that computer simulations are fun but far from an accurate science.
    Overheal wrote: »
    The paper (Computer Simulation for Building Implosion Using LS-DYNA) involved here is especially enlightening about the nature of performing these types of computer simulations - and they cut corners:

    "The experience gained from these [preliminary simulation] examples showed firstly that the element erosion-algorithm in the case of non vertical collapse scenarios, in which failure occurs mostly due to strong bending of elements and not due to high pressures, can provide reliable results, at least for the initial collapse kinematics. On the other hand, the erosion scheme should not be applied in the case of a vertical collapse, since as a result of removing elements it does not deliver reliable results. The node-split-algorithm, however, is more time consuming and imposes several changes in the discretization, but is a better alternative which delivers realistic results even in the case of vertical collapse with high pressures and material failure due to strong compression."

    [...]

    "The finite element model consists of 392481 8-node hexahedral solid elements. At first, the CAD geometry was created from the building drawings.
    Then, using the preprocessor Hypermesh [14], the finite element mesh was constructed and imported into LS-DYNA. At this final stage, all the numerical algorithms were applied, such as material model, element formulation etc. In the computations to be presented a rather simple, piecewise linear, plasticity model is used (LS-DYNA MAT24) for efficiency reasons. However, some limitations have to be mentioned resulting from the fairly simple failure criterion. In addition to that, it must be noted that also in the case when Node-Split is applied, a rather high resolution of the model is necessary in order to capture sufficiently the entire cracking process. Furthermore, by using continua for the modelling of reinforced concrete the effect of the steel bars is “smeared” in the continuum. E.g. the presence of steel bars, after the mechanical failure of the concrete, would in reality prevent structural parts from flying away from the structure. However, in the simulations when the continua fail, a complete dissolution is obtained. This results in general in an overly brittle behaviour and some elements are flying away from the structure, In the simulations we try to damp this motion which is not a perfect solution. The ground plate is simulated as a rigid body and the building collapses under the effect of gravity."


    The compute time for the final model was over 716 hours (29 days). Not including the time spent generating the CAD, mesh, and all the necessary modifications to stop the simulation from crashing out (and the time wasted on simulations that ultimately crashed out):

    "New contact interfaces are created and included in the search contact algorithm which is very time consuming and as a consequence slows down the entire computation. In order to remove the major part of the artificial energy which was added to the model during the application of the initial gravitation with explicit time integration, the system had to be damped for 0.1 second, otherwise large vibrations were leading to error terminations.

    It proved to be particularly important to avoid the “inversion” of solid elements leading to negative volumes and finally to error terminations, as a result of large element deformations. In order to handle this problem additional contact checks were added which consider contacts between interior surfaces of the hexahedral elements to avoid an inversion. Nevertheless, in the results the limitation in the applicability of the Node Split algorithm is observed from the very strong dissolution of element connections due to material failure, which creates for some parts unrealistic phenomena (structural parts flying e.t.c). The latter would not be possible with reinforcing steel which mostly prevents a complete dissolution of parts."

    (ie. they had no way to truly computationally model the destruction mode for reinforced concrete, so it was approximated heavily). Basically, these simulations are incredibly resource and time intensive, and difficult to work with even when you are reverse-engineering an implosion with all your conditions known with regard to explosives used and behavior during the collapse ex post facto. Note also this is a 2011 paper, and the simulation produced was not anything used to control the implosion of the building when it went down in 2004.

    And in that study - with known variables and a controlled demolition and no guessing required to how the collapse started, and years of software and hardware advancements: they still came up with a strange model, that starts falling, falling, falling, Rising again, then falling...

    475852.PNG


  • #108
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,189 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Overheal wrote: »
    Yes I've labored the point before that computer simulations are fun but far from an accurate science.



    And in that study - with known variables and a controlled demolition and no guessing required to how the collapse started, and years of software and hardware advancements: they still came up with a strange model, that starts falling, falling, falling, Rising again, then falling...

    475852.PNG

    Yeah but it doesn't look right to me, so inside job


  • #109
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Overheal wrote: »
    Yes I've labored the point before that computer simulations are fun but far from an accurate science.

    Stop it please- free fall will only happen from the east one corner to the west corner ( span of the entire building) when the steel and concrete support missing and no longer there to support the top half.

    You see, here in the NIST model (they do not collapse the 8 floors) Resistance is
    still provided (west side) the top half squeezing the bottom half ;)

    Game over have a nice day :) fake freefall.
    514353.png


  • #110
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Stop it please- free fall will only happen from the east one corner to the west corner ( span of the entire building) when the steel and concrete support missing and no longer there to support the top half.

    You see, here in the NIST model (they do not collapse the 8 floors) Resistance is
    still provided (west side) the top half squeezing the bottom half ;)

    Game over have a nice day :) fake freefall.
    514353.png

    So you're now saying the building did not experience free fall collapse? Strange.


  • #111
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Overheal wrote: »
    So you're now saying the building did not experience free fall collapse? Strange.

    You can see, the windows breaks on the west side up top (nist computer model)
    This is the same capture of that on video
    514357.png

    Now look at NIST model underneath :)


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    The NIST model is imperfect.

    It's also not the end all be all of whether the buildings fell. Clearly, they did. And even your own links confirm the outside of the building fell for at least 2 seconds in free fall.


  • #113
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

    Have you read this? It's the most detailed explanation of freefall you find online. He goes over every aspect why its impossible by natural means.
    https://medium.com/@davidchandler_61838/free-fall-131a94a1be7e

    "After about 2.5 seconds of free fall, the slope deviates from a straight line, indicating resistance as the falling part of the building engages with the bottom section. 2.5 seconds of free fall corresponds to a distance of 30.6 m, or about 100 ft. At 12.5 ft per floor, that divides out to 8 stories of free fall."

    In other threads you argued this was not the case? Even got into some dizzying and error-filled semantics about acceleration and velocity and speed.


  • #114
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    You can see, the windows breaks on the west side up top (nist computer model)
    This is the same capture of that on video
    514357.png

    Now look at NIST model underneath :)

    By the way I don't see that NIST put the windows in the model?


  • #115
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Overheal wrote: »
    The NIST model is imperfect.

    It's also not the end all be all of whether the buildings fell. Clearly, they did. And even your own links confirm the outside of the building fell for at least 2 seconds in free fall.

    Not imperfect, you know why? Weiss and myself and Roy pointed it out already free fall is an impossibility in a natural collapse. NIST even said that in Aug 2008 and was the reason they dismissed the freefall.

    NIST had no time to change their model in three months, it was out already, so they covered up the lie with words instead in a revised paper.

    In the NIST model there no freefall- explained and you got shown images that prove this.


  • #116
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Not imperfect, you know why? Weiss and myself and Roy putted it out already free fall is an impossibility in a natural collapse. NIST even said that in Aug 2008 and was the reason they dismissed the freefall.

    NIST had no time to change their model in three months, it was out already, so they covered up the lie with words instead in a revised paper.

    In the NIST model there no freefall- explained and you got shown images that prove this.

    So, you're saying the NIST model is Perfect? :confused:


  • #117
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Overheal wrote: »
    So, you're saying the NIST model is Perfect? :confused:

    If they're no free fall in the model, yes they are fakers. Why you denying this when you have video with them saying this.

    They denied free fall in Aug 2008, the video exists watch it.


  • #118
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    If they're no free fall in the model, yes they are fakers. Why you denying this when you have video with them saying this.

    They denied free fall in Aug 2008, the video exists watch it.

    Which is it:

    a) The NIST model is perfect

    b) The NIST model is imperfect

    ?


  • #119
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Overheal wrote: »
    "After about 2.5 seconds of free fall, the slope deviates from a straight line, indicating resistance as the falling part of the building engages with the bottom section. 2.5 seconds of free fall corresponds to a distance of 30.6 m, or about 100 ft. At 12.5 ft per floor, that divides out to 8 stories of free fall."

    In other threads you argued this was not the case? Even got into some dizzying and error-filled semantics about acceleration and velocity and speed.

    By bottom half, they mean the rubble!


  • #120
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Overheal wrote: »
    Which is it:

    a) The NIST model is perfect

    b) The NIST model is imperfect

    ?

    Thier entire study is fake including the models.
    They're no freefall here, end of story.
    514365.png

    Truthers have done the real science here, NIST should be in court facing criminal charges.


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Thier entire study is fake including the models.
    They're no freefall here, end of story.
    514365.png

    Truthers have done the real science here, NIST should be in court facing criminal charges.

    Okay so we can ignore NIST and just focus on what happened.

    The exterior fell for 2+ seconds in free fall.

    Your own links say there was free fall.


  • #122
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Overheal wrote: »
    Okay so we can ignore NIST and just focus on what happened.

    The exterior fell for 2+ seconds in free fall.

    Your own links say there was free fall.

    8 floors collapsed from one corner wall to the next corner wall (east to west) ( to enable freefall ) "100 feet of floors" this not shown in the NIST model.


  • #123
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Plasco was in Iran- one of the worst places on earth for maintaining building standards. They made it of concrete and steel, no fireproofing, the Iranians declared the building unsafe before the collapse. Gas canisters were stored inside the building ( temps above normal) plus it collapsed with four corners toppling inwards (another clue its natural)

    From your link:
    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

    Have you read this? It's the most detailed explanation of freefall you find online. He goes over every aspect why its impossible by natural means.
    https://medium.com/@davidchandler_61838/free-fall-131a94a1be7e

    It reads:

    All four corners of the building start downward within a fraction of a second of each other. The roof line remains essentially level during the entire period of free fall. Whatever is happening to remove resistance is happening across the entire width of the building simultaneously to within a small fraction of a second. Lack of precise synchronization in the removal of support would lead to tumbling.


  • #124
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    8 floors collapsed from one corner wall to the next corner wall (east to west) ( to enable freefall ) "100 feet of floors" this not shown in the NIST model.

    That's okay we can throw out the NIST model.


  • #125
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Overheal wrote: »
    From your link:



    It reads:

    All four corners of the building start downward within a fraction of a second of each other. The roof line remains essentially level during the entire period of free fall. Whatever is happening to remove resistance is happening across the entire width of the building simultaneously to within a small fraction of a second. Lack of precise synchronization in the removal of support would lead to tumbling.

    Why you mixing up two different events on different sides of the world?


  • #126
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Overheal wrote: »
    That's okay we can throw out the NIST model.

    No we can't throw it out, its evidence. Truthers are right.


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Why you mixing up two different events on different sides of the world?

    That should be evident from the posts.

    You wished to argue that 4 corners collapsing together proved that the Plasco building collapse was natural.

    4 corners of WTC 7 collapsed together as well. By your logic, this proves the collapse was natural.


  • #128
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Overheal wrote: »
    That should be evident from the posts.

    You wished to argue that 4 corners collapsing together proved that the Plasco building collapse was natural.

    4 corners of WTC 7 collapsed together as well. By your logic, this proves the collapse was natural.

    He describing freefall and why its impossible by fire

    All four corners of the building start downward within a fraction of a second of each other.

    The roof line remains essentially level during the entire period of free fall.

    Whatever is happening to remove resistance is happening across the entire width of the building simultaneously to within a small fraction of a second.

    Lack of precise synchronization in the removal of support would lead to tumbling (this would be case in a natural collapse)

    Look at videos at videos of the Iranian collapse and you see not a similar collapse. Iran buildings walls converged to a central point in the middle.

    I getting a headache now, i am off for the day. NIST fooled lot of people and sad people still defend it.


  • #129
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    sad people still defend it. [/B]

    Remarks like this don't belong in the forum.


  • #130
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Overheal wrote: »
    Remarks like this don't belong in the forum.

    Was not directed at you personally, sorry if you took that way :)
    Keep reading Chandler blog, he has 5 parts, it gets better the more you read it!
    See you later.


  • #131
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Was not directed at you personally, sorry if you took that way :)
    Keep reading Chandler blog, he has 5 parts, it gets better the more you read it!
    See you later.

    I didn't say you were. I'm telling you comments like that don't belong on the forum. That doesn't demand any meta commentary. Stay on topic.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,189 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    I getting a headache now, i am off for the day. NIST fooled lot of people and sad people still defend it.

    *Don't forget the Collapse Analysis and Assessment Report on WTC 7 carried out by Weidlinger

    Which also found WTC 7 fell due to fire, and, you know, received the 2015 American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC) National Grand Award
    New York, NY, April 23, 2015 --(PR.com)-- International consulting engineer Weidlinger Associates, Inc., received a 2015 American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC) National Grand Award for the firm’s comprehensive forensic investigation of the collapse of 7 World Trade Center (7 WTC). The award is one of ACEC’s top honors; as one of only eight Grand Award winners, the project was also a finalist for the ACEC 2015 Grand Conceptor Award, which recognizes the nation’s best overall engineering project.
    https://www.pr.com/press-release/616337
    A 5 year independent study by a team at an engineering firm corroborating the findings of the FEMA report, and the NIST report

    A firm of 300 employees that has won 150 engineering awards. Previously in 2004 they won a National Grand Conceptor Award from the American Consulting Engineers Council for their study in the WTC collapse

    https://s3.amazonaws.com/tt_assets/pdf/WTC_7_Collapse_Analysis_and_Assessment_Report.pdf
    Viewed together, these images show that failure at this floor first begins with the collapse
    of the girder between columns 79 and 80. The knife connections at both ends of this
    girder fail in major-axis rotation and the girder begins to fall. The secondary beams
    framing into the east side of this girder remain connected; the west ends of these beams
    therefore fall with the girder. Once the rotation of these beams becomes great enough,
    Collapse analysis and assessment
    the seated and header connections at the perimeter frame fail in major-axis rotation. At
    this point, the entire assemblage becomes free-falling debris.

    Ah crap, even they are mentioning free-fall


  • #133
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    *Don't forget the Collapse Analysis and Assessment Report on WTC 7 carried out by Weidlinger

    Which also found WTC 7 fell due to fire, the one that received the 2015 American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC) National Grand Award


    https://www.pr.com/press-release/616337



    https://s3.amazonaws.com/tt_assets/pdf/WTC_7_Collapse_Analysis_and_Assessment_Report.pdf

    Ah crap, even they are mentioning free-fall

    How does one column collapsing allegedly cause freefall?
    Freefall can only happen here when 84 steel columns, girders, beams- floor slaps every connection there, across the entire width of the building collapsed :rolleyes:
    NIST model does not show that- look at the images provided.


  • #134
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    How does one column collapsing allegedly cause freefall?
    Freefall can only happen here when 84 steel columns, girders, beams- floor slaps every connection there, across the entire width of the building collapsed :rolleyes:
    NIST model does not show that- look at the images provided.

    Weidlinger study seems very comprehensive in this regard

    https://s3.amazonaws.com/tt_assets/pdf/WTC_7_Collapse_Analysis_and_Assessment_Report.pdf


  • #135
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,189 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Leaked transcript uncovered..
    SECRET BLACK-OPS MEETING TRANSCRIPT:

    Mr.X : The plan is to fake an attack on the US by flying four jumbo jets into specific targets.

    Col. Y: What are the targets?

    Mr. X: Both towers of the WTC in New York, the Pentagon, and a field somewhere in Pennsylvania.

    Col. Y: Okay, what? Why crash a plane into Pennsylvania?

    Mr.X: I'll get to that. Phase 1 will be the crashes, and Phase 2 will be the collapse of the buildings using controlled demolition.

    Col Y: Are you nuts? Why not rig the buildings with explosives and set them off instead of flying jumbo jets into them?

    Mr.X: We need a believable narrative?

    Col Y: What kind of narrative?

    Mr.X: We plan to invade Afghanistan and Iraq under the cover of these attacks. Those buildings need to come down.

    Col Y: Why isn't crashing jets into the targets enough?

    Mr X: We need the visuals, footage of the towers collapsing will be played over and over enraging the American people until they demand revenge.

    Col Y: Okay. And we frame Iraqi Republican Guards and the Taliban for the attacks?

    Mr.X: No, we'll frame Egyptians, Saudis, and everyone but Iraqis?

    Col Y: But you said we're using the attacks as an excuse to invade Iraq and Afghanistan? Why aren't we going to frame their governments?

    Mr X: Too obvious.

    Col Y: But won't the American people prefer we deal with the Saudis?

    Mr.X: Leave that to me.

    Col Y: Okay, so we invade Iraq and Afghanistan a week after the attack, right?

    Mr X: No, fool, we invade Afghanistan first because we're framing Al Qaeda.

    Col Y: Why not just strike Al Qaeda now? They bombed two of our embassies and the USS Cole. Why not just fake an intelligence report that they're planning a big strike in the US and then thwack them and invade Afghanistan under that pretense?

    Mr X: We need dead Americans.

    Col Y: When do we invade Iraq?

    Mr X: Two years later. We're going to claim that they're stockpiling WMD's.

    Col Y: They don't have any WMD's. Are we going to fly in some of our chemical stockpile to plant in Iraq?

    Mr X: No.

    Col Y: So we're going to wire three buildings with demo charges and fly jumbo jets - not hijacked by Iraqis or Afghans - into these targets to invade two countries...because why?

    Mr X: Money and control.

    Col Y: My kid is at Harvard and he says the money will be in something called Social Media.

    Mr X: No, war is the answer (twirls mustache).


  • #136
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Overheal wrote: »
    Weidlinger study seems very comprehensive in this regard

    https://s3.amazonaws.com/tt_assets/pdf/WTC_7_Collapse_Analysis_and_Assessment_Report.pdf

    This group claims NIST is wrong about the failure at column 79. Dr Bailey theory the same as NIST's.

    514370.png


  • #137
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    This group claims NIST is wrong about the failure at column 79. Dr Bailey theory the same as NIST's.

    514370.png

    And?


  • #138
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Overheal wrote: »
    And?

    No girder slipped from its seat at column 79 and 44, no progressive collapse inside the building.
    They fighting with each other how it happened. Reality is we know how it happened it was a controlled demolition


  • #139
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    No girder slipped from its seat at column 79 and 44, no progressive collapse inside the building.
    They fighting with each other how it happened.

    The weidlinger report is extremely thorough about how it happened.

    https://s3.amazonaws.com/tt_assets/pdf/WTC_7_Collapse_Analysis_and_Assessment_Report.pdf

    It certainly wasn't controlled demolition, we have already ruled out the possibility in other threads.


  • #140
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Overheal wrote: »
    The weidlinger report is extremely thorough about how it happened.

    https://s3.amazonaws.com/tt_assets/pdf/WTC_7_Collapse_Analysis_and_Assessment_Report.pdf

    What floor does Weidlinger claim the collapse started on read the report and reply.


  • #141
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    What floor does Weidlinger claim the collapse started on read the report and reply.

    They mention it in the report

    https://s3.amazonaws.com/tt_assets/pdf/WTC_7_Collapse_Analysis_and_Assessment_Report.pdf

    read the report then reply.


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,189 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    It was amazing that in all the litigation and insurance claims in the years after 9/11, wrangling over WTC 7 diesel fires, over whether the building was technically unsound... absolutely no one, not a soul, not a single insurance claim out of thousands, pointed to or discovered "controlled demolition"

    And of course..

    assange911.jpg


  • #143
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Overheal wrote: »
    They mention it in the report

    https://s3.amazonaws.com/tt_assets/pdf/WTC_7_Collapse_Analysis_and_Assessment_Report.pdf

    read the report then reply.

    Is the same floors where NIST said the collapse started?

    They claim it began on 9th and 10th floor and NIST says 13th floor on the eastside (left)

    If you look at photographic evidence- New York fire department chopper images between 3pm and 4pm ) seven collapsed an hour later) all fires on the eastside are out.

    514374.png

    The story is fake.


  • #144
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,189 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Snowden didn't find anything either..
    PSA for all the Area 51 stormers, chemtrail believers and climate change deniers: Edward Snowden has searched the depths of the US intelligence networks and can report the conspiracy theories are not true.

    As a former employee of the CIA and contractor for the National Security Agency, Snowden had access to some of the nation's most closely held secrets.
    And, like any curious mind with access to the CIA's version of Google might do, he went in search of answers to some of society's most pressing questions.
    As it turns out, the US government is not aware of any intelligent, extraterrestrial life, he says.
    "For the record, as far as I could tell, aliens have never contacted Earth, or at least they haven't contacted US intelligence," Snowden writes in his recent memoir, "Permanent Record."
    Also, the moon landing did indeed occur.
    "In case you were wondering: Yes, man really did land on the moon. Climate change is real. Chemtrails are not a thing," he adds.
    The NSA whistleblower addressed the conspiracies again on an episode of "The Joe Rogan Experience" podcast, released Wednesday, saying "there's no evidence" of aliens and chemtrails and the like.
    "I know, Joe, I know you want there to be aliens," Snowden joked to Rogan, the podcast's host. "I know Neil deGrasse Tyson badly wants there to be aliens. And there probably are, right?
    "But the idea that we're hiding them -- if we are hiding them -- I had ridiculous access to the networks of the NSA, the CIA, the military, all these groups. I couldn't find anything," he continued. "So if it's hidden, and it could be hidden, it's hidden really damn well, even from people who are on the inside."

    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/10/23/us/edward-snowden-joe-rogan-conspiracies-trnd/index.html


  • #145
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Is the same floors where NIST said the collapse started?

    They claim it began on 9th and 10th floor and NIST says 13th floor on the eastside (left)

    If you look at photographic evidence- New York fire department chopper images between 3pm and 4pm ) seven collapsed an hour later) all fires on the eastside are out.

    514374.png

    The story is fake.

    You say that yet the photo you linked to clearly displays fires.


  • #146
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Overheal wrote: »
    You say that yet the photo you linked to clearly displays fires.

    Building seven only one in the picture has collapsed to pockets of fires. They are all steel framed high rises on fire.

    514375.png

    http://bgye.sohw0.top/


  • #147
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Building seven only one in the picture has collapsed to pockets of fires. They are all steel framed high rises on fire.

    514375.png

    http://bgye.sohw0.top/

    2344958.jpg?ts=1486462047399


  • #148
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    If you look at photographic evidence- New York fire department chopper images between 3pm and 4pm ) seven collapsed an hour later)

    Post evidence for this claim please.

    You keep posting attachments rather than linking to primary or secondary sources, in a deliberate attempt to obfuscate your argument.


  • #149
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Overheal wrote: »
    2344958.jpg?ts=1486462047399

    Does this look like building seven collapse to you?



  • #150
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,045 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Does this look like building seven collapse to you?


    No? Strange strawman argument to make.

    It looks like a steel framed building with concrete slab floors that collapsed due to fire, which burned in pockets of the building.

    WTC 7 was a steel framed building with concrete slab floors that collapsed due to fire, which burned in pockets of the building.


  • Advertisement
  • #151
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,189 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Building seven only one in the picture has collapsed to pockets of fires.

    Not according to the firefighters and eye-witnesses who were there
    "The building was fully involved in fire."
    – Photographer Steve Spak
    "I had a clear view down Washington Street of Building Seven, which was on the north edge of the site. All forty-seven stories were on fire. It was wild. The MPs said the building was going to collapse. I said, "Nah, I don't know." And then all of a sudden I watched the building shake like an earthquake hit it, and the building came down."
    –Ground Zero Superintendant Charlie Vitchers
    We walked over by number Seven World Trade Center as it was burning and saw this 40-plus story building with fire on nearly all floors.
    –FDNY Lieutenant Robert Larocco
    Building #7 was still actively burning and at that time we were advised by a NYFD Chief that building #7 was burning out of control and imminent collapse was probable.
    –PAPD P.O. Edward McQuade
    Because it really got going, that building Seven, saw it late in the day and like the first Seven floors were on fire. It looked like heavy fire on seven floors. It was fully engulfed, that whole building.
    - Firefighter Tiernach Cassidy
    ...Just when you thought it was over, you're walking by this building and you're hearing this building creak and fully involved in flames. It's like, is it coming down next? Sure enough, about a half an hour later it came down.
    –FDNY Lieutenant James McGlynn
    I walked out and I got to Vesey and West, where I reported to Frank [Cruthers]. He said, we’re moving the command post over this way, that building’s coming down. At this point, the fire was going virtually on every floor,
    –FDNY Deputy Chief Nick Visconti
    When the building came down it was completely involved in fire, all forty-seven stories.
    –FDNY Assistant Chief Harry Myers
    Then we had to move because the Duane Reade, they said, wasn't safe because building 7 was really roaring.
    –FDNY Chief Medical Officer Kerry Kelly.
    At this point Seven World Trade was going heavy, and they weren't letting anybody get too close. Everybody was expecting that to come down. –
    Firefighter Vincent Massa

    There are a lot more of these..


Advertisement