Puffs, he describes them as airs, it is just impossible he lost his credibility right there.
Technical question on WTC collapse
- Thread starter Logic 7
- Start date
Puffs, he describes them as airs, it is just impossible he lost his credibility right there.
Sassy
Thanks to your husband's contribution to this topic and sharing it with us.
I fail to understand why some people work so hard at trying to pin the WTC on Bush or the CIA or Captain Doom.
Bush isn't smart enough, the CIA in those days couldn't find their shoes to get to work, and Captain Doom must be your mentor.
The fact is a monumental event of destruction such as this cannot be proven until evidence is gathered after the fact.
Nobody can test hardness or flash point or distintegration time or resistance, or anything about steel or any of the other construction material details the Towers contained unless an actual event was replicated before the towers were built - That would be the ultimate paranoia - to imagine such an event could be executed in reality.
I hope we haven't descended so far into that kind of thought. If so, we would have to be thinking like the madmen who did the deed on orders from the insane.
Conveniently missing as usual in the discussions are the other two arenas of horror:
The Flight 93 field in Pennsylvania and the Pentagon.
Thanks to your husband's contribution to this topic and sharing it with us.
I fail to understand why some people work so hard at trying to pin the WTC on Bush or the CIA or Captain Doom.
Bush isn't smart enough, the CIA in those days couldn't find their shoes to get to work, and Captain Doom must be your mentor.
The fact is a monumental event of destruction such as this cannot be proven until evidence is gathered after the fact.
Nobody can test hardness or flash point or distintegration time or resistance, or anything about steel or any of the other construction material details the Towers contained unless an actual event was replicated before the towers were built - That would be the ultimate paranoia - to imagine such an event could be executed in reality.
I hope we haven't descended so far into that kind of thought. If so, we would have to be thinking like the madmen who did the deed on orders from the insane.
Conveniently missing as usual in the discussions are the other two arenas of horror:
The Flight 93 field in Pennsylvania and the Pentagon.
You can "assure", all you want, but I wouldn't set foot in a multi-story high rise building designed by a welder no matter how many years of experience he/she had. Architects and engineers are but part of a team that gets a building from the planning stage, to the finished building. The architects, and the engineering specialists, as well as the carpenters, plumbers, electricians, and welders all do their own job, and we need all of them.
How funny is it that the conspiracy theorists actually want 9-11 to have been an inside job. It seems it is almost a maturbatory fanatsy for them for the Bush administration to have killed fellow Americans and everyone else in those towers. CT's still have no explanations for where all the people in the towers went, still no explanation for how all the 1000's of people involved in the conspiracy have managed to keep their mouths shut. They still have ZERO proof(so-called proof) by someone other than a Bush hater that 9-11 was an inside job. Still no explanations for Osama Bin Laden taking credit for it...et cetera....
What would you CT's be saying now, if John Kerry had been president? Because it would have still happened. Would you have blamed it on Clinton? Or would you have just kept going backward in time till you found another right wing President worthy of your scorn? Reagan maybe? OR farther back? Lincoln, maybe? He was a republican you know...
What would you CT's be saying now, if John Kerry had been president? Because it would have still happened. Would you have blamed it on Clinton? Or would you have just kept going backward in time till you found another right wing President worthy of your scorn? Reagan maybe? OR farther back? Lincoln, maybe? He was a republican you know...
You guys just cant do lateral thinking. You have the immediate reaction that bombs in the building mean the government deliberately bombed to start a war.
The point is, there may be another reason for this.
Maybe the videos, and the demolition expert analysis and the scientific evaluation of the presence of thermite indicate a controlled demolition because maybe it WAS a controlled demolition.
But a controlled demolition is NOT the same as a planned destruction of a building to start a war.
The initial bombing of the Trade Centre was an attempt to topple the building by destroying a part of the structural base. If this bombing had succeeded and the building toppled, it would have been catastrophic because a building of this height that falls sideways would take out ten to twenty city blocks. Perhaps in recognition of this, it was realized that there had to be a safety contingency. To plan for the vertical implosion of a building this size takes companies months of study of the blueprints, structure and surrounding environment. It then takes a long time to place the explosives in the right site. Only experts can perform this operation and even then it is fraught with danger. The likelihood of two towers falling vertically exactly as one would desire without planning is quite unlikely.
Perhaps the government had predetermined and prepared the buildings for implosion in the unlikely event of a further bombing. Perhaps it was to safe guard the ten to twenty surrounding city blocks that it was decided that the buildings would have to be imploded. While this would mean loss of life and the building itself, it would limit it just to that building and not the surrounding area. The loss of life and destruction would have been exponentially more if the buildings had collapsed sideways.
Governments have to sometimes make choices and maybe this is one of those choices that had been predetermined. This is not so outrageous as you would like to think. After all, now if you are on a plane that is appearing to head into a building, the airforce may shoot you down. Even though you are an innocent civilian on the plane, you would have to be sacrificed to prevent further destruction.
We will probably never know the true story. But to immediately disregard possibilities just because you dont want to consider governmental involvement IS closing your minds.
The point is, there may be another reason for this.
Maybe the videos, and the demolition expert analysis and the scientific evaluation of the presence of thermite indicate a controlled demolition because maybe it WAS a controlled demolition.
But a controlled demolition is NOT the same as a planned destruction of a building to start a war.
The initial bombing of the Trade Centre was an attempt to topple the building by destroying a part of the structural base. If this bombing had succeeded and the building toppled, it would have been catastrophic because a building of this height that falls sideways would take out ten to twenty city blocks. Perhaps in recognition of this, it was realized that there had to be a safety contingency. To plan for the vertical implosion of a building this size takes companies months of study of the blueprints, structure and surrounding environment. It then takes a long time to place the explosives in the right site. Only experts can perform this operation and even then it is fraught with danger. The likelihood of two towers falling vertically exactly as one would desire without planning is quite unlikely.
Perhaps the government had predetermined and prepared the buildings for implosion in the unlikely event of a further bombing. Perhaps it was to safe guard the ten to twenty surrounding city blocks that it was decided that the buildings would have to be imploded. While this would mean loss of life and the building itself, it would limit it just to that building and not the surrounding area. The loss of life and destruction would have been exponentially more if the buildings had collapsed sideways.
Governments have to sometimes make choices and maybe this is one of those choices that had been predetermined. This is not so outrageous as you would like to think. After all, now if you are on a plane that is appearing to head into a building, the airforce may shoot you down. Even though you are an innocent civilian on the plane, you would have to be sacrificed to prevent further destruction.
We will probably never know the true story. But to immediately disregard possibilities just because you dont want to consider governmental involvement IS closing your minds.
TenPenny your post was very correct and accurate. One who is not a design or construction engineer has no idea what will or won't cause a high rise to collapse after a short period of time like an hour or so when an airplane crashes into it deliberately at high speed loaded with fuel.
These comments about puffs is another piece of nonsense. There is in every building from a bungalow to a highrise vents for air conditioning and heating. There is always a constant flow of air and when it captures items such as smoke it will circulate it and at times it is will become obvious.
There is no doubt in my mind and special engineeers here who I have spoken with that have said the aircraft that deliberately crashed into the WTC's were the root cause of the collapse of those buildings.
The pilots were Al Qaeda trained and paid by Osama Bin Layton.
These comments about puffs is another piece of nonsense. There is in every building from a bungalow to a highrise vents for air conditioning and heating. There is always a constant flow of air and when it captures items such as smoke it will circulate it and at times it is will become obvious.
There is no doubt in my mind and special engineeers here who I have spoken with that have said the aircraft that deliberately crashed into the WTC's were the root cause of the collapse of those buildings.
The pilots were Al Qaeda trained and paid by Osama Bin Layton.
I really can't believe that those buildings were destroyed by anything except those damned great planes hitting them. I admit I can't explain those puffs of smoke but i havent seen them so maybe they didnt happen or maybe they were just part of the collapse. I dont know. I also admit that the vertical collapse seems weird but maybe the structure of the building itself kept the collapse constrained.
The fact is probably none of us know enough to be able to say for sure.
Occam's razor could be applied though...
The fact is probably none of us know enough to be able to say for sure.
Occam's razor could be applied though...
No offence fuzzy, but do you know anything about steel?
I reeeaaally hate to say this, it is against my character to toot my own horn, but I know what happens to steel sheets, rods, pipes, plates and girders, when you heat them, because I have extensive knowledge and experience in the matter.
There is NO DEFUSION AT ALL IF THE STEEL STRUCTURE IS SURROUNDED BY FIRE. There is only swift degredation in the integrady of the steel. period.
Besides, how much heat sinking do you think happens when heat is applied to steel. It doesn't run like water. The area closest to the heat source will parge and fail in a short period of time. It doesn't take much. What don't you understand about that?
Do I believe the US Government had explicit knowledge of what was to come? Yes. Do I believe they had a physical hand in it? No.
Are there a multitude of un-answered questions? Yes, and there always will be. Just as with JFK, the simplest explanation is never going to satisfy those that can not cope with the reality, that in this world there are groups that appose our way of life and they will do anything in their power to destroy it.
You really should change your name. You wouldn't get logic, if it fell from the sky, landed on your face and started to wiggle.
That explanation made perfect sence.
Uh- Sorry, if I want to know how to collapse or not collapse a building, I'll ask a structural engineer.
But if I want someone to actually fly into the building, I'll keep you in mind...
I absolutely agree, my point was, without physical trials, there is no way to confirm a building is going to withstand the impact and subsiquent trauma, from a jet liner. All the number crunching in the world was test and failed on 9/11. The fact that it appears to work on paper, does not mean that it will work in the practical. I see it at least two or three times a month. I pride myself on trying to accomplish what is put to print before me, but I have had to get Engineers and Architects change plans drasticly to accomidate the reallity of the situation. Now, after 9/11, the data is in. Maybe now they will be able to take a hit like that.
All the it shoulda's, it was suposeda's or we designed it to's, don't amount to much when the proof falls like a stone.
You make excellent points, and they are plausable. I have not counted any of the theories you put forth out. My point is the data that is put forth by persons, not unlike myself, is just poo-poo'ed by the CT's. Until it becomes infuriating.
Most notions put forth, seem plausible and credible, until the government conspiracy is attatched to it in a negative light.
Your theory of the building being pre-wired, is a sound theory. If it were true, and the person that had to make the decission did push the button as it were, do you think he/she would won't that known? The other side of this coin is, can you imagine the hue and cry if that were the case? Why didn't you wait? Why did you do it? YOU"RE A MURDERER!!!
That's why, if it is true, you, me and the rest of the world should and will never know.
BTW, there was no such finding of the compounds Cordite or Thermite, in the rubble. There were markers. Markers that can come from a million other items that were squished together under extreme pressure and heat.
So if what you say is true, that there were bombs planted in the towers to prevent it from toppling sideways, then would it not be plausible that there are bombs planted in the Sears tower as well? Last time I checked, that building could take out 20 blocks as well.
Anyway, if there were bombs planted in the WTC towers, somebody must have put them there and it must be more than one person doing it. I would be surprised that a something like this didn't leak out to the public... because stuff like this is hard to keep quiet.
Mystery of steelstructures collapsing??????
Hello Friends,
there is nothing unsuspecting or even surprising if a fueled up Plane hits the WTC Tower and cause its collapse.
The effect of the energy to wreck the structural integrity was not immediate visable but given some time to heat up the loadbearing members the collapse was exactly what anyone with the expertise of steel structures would expect.
No mystery at all.
Unlike other skyscraper this type had the main loadbearing columns on the exterior; the initial damage
did not cause the collapse but like a chair with one leg broken still standing.
But as the intense release of jetfuel and combustables heated up the other sofar unaffected columns the collapse of the affected floors was just amatter of time to elevate temperatures in the steel to the critical point of failure.
All steel strutures(columns) are encased in fireproofing(concrete, insulation) good to last for the safe evacuation of peoples and prevent total structural failure in case of ordinary fire.
But the huge impact and intense heat was no match and is not practical to design for. Unless you consider WWII Concrete Bunkers.
Remember all floors above are still supported by the structure in the damaged floors and acting like a
Millstone on someone drowning.
The collapse started with the impact and weight of the above floors loads crushing the damaged and weakend floors; the inertia caused by this huge mass almost free falling caused the next floor below to collapse, and so on.... but with increasing speed and destructive power. Just like a Domino setup but vertically.
I remember the topfloors just coming down in one piece and slanted for a while with the antenna still visible.
The first tower was hit higher up with less load above impact zone ;so it took much more time to weaken the structure to the point of failure. Not so for the second Tower.
Bin Laden by the way was trained in (structural?)engineering; he shure knew how to do it.
nelk
Hello Friends,
there is nothing unsuspecting or even surprising if a fueled up Plane hits the WTC Tower and cause its collapse.
The effect of the energy to wreck the structural integrity was not immediate visable but given some time to heat up the loadbearing members the collapse was exactly what anyone with the expertise of steel structures would expect.
No mystery at all.
Unlike other skyscraper this type had the main loadbearing columns on the exterior; the initial damage
did not cause the collapse but like a chair with one leg broken still standing.
But as the intense release of jetfuel and combustables heated up the other sofar unaffected columns the collapse of the affected floors was just amatter of time to elevate temperatures in the steel to the critical point of failure.
All steel strutures(columns) are encased in fireproofing(concrete, insulation) good to last for the safe evacuation of peoples and prevent total structural failure in case of ordinary fire.
But the huge impact and intense heat was no match and is not practical to design for. Unless you consider WWII Concrete Bunkers.
Remember all floors above are still supported by the structure in the damaged floors and acting like a
Millstone on someone drowning.
The collapse started with the impact and weight of the above floors loads crushing the damaged and weakend floors; the inertia caused by this huge mass almost free falling caused the next floor below to collapse, and so on.... but with increasing speed and destructive power. Just like a Domino setup but vertically.
I remember the topfloors just coming down in one piece and slanted for a while with the antenna still visible.
The first tower was hit higher up with less load above impact zone ;so it took much more time to weaken the structure to the point of failure. Not so for the second Tower.
Bin Laden by the way was trained in (structural?)engineering; he shure knew how to do it.
nelk
That academics group here in the US, Scholars for 9/11 Truth or whatever, has exactly zero structural engineers in their group.
slightly off-topic but interesting now that the towers are now known only by the order in which they were hit. I assume before they had named like a and b or east and west or something
Hermann
I thought they were One and Two.... but cannot be certain.....
Where is I Think Not when we need him? Our resident New Yorker.
I thought they were One and Two.... but cannot be certain.....
Where is I Think Not when we need him? Our resident New Yorker.
Exactly. It could be that in fact several or many major sites either of dangerous height or even of a sensitive military or information nature could be prewired to implode. and of course, no one would want to work in a loaded bomb so this would be quite a sensitive issue.
Could it be kept quiet? Admittedly, information leaks, but then again think of all the massive military information known to people that DOESN'T get leaked by people who do adhere to the strict confidentiality of their jobs. Or, alternately, one day as someone involved is dying, maybe they will have a deathbed confession as sometimes happens.