The collapse of WTC7 Thread

And... that's it? A 7-second collapse? Because of simple fires?

Edited by: feillyne

Ok, the building used an exoskeleton like structure in which the outer walls hold up most the weight of the building ...

this structure was probably designed to withstand low temperature fires (couple 100 degrees tops) ... with about a safety factor of about ... what ... 1.5? (you need at least a safety factor of 1 for the building to be standing under its own weight and it wouldn't be a ton above 1 due to costs of construction)

Anyway ... then the plane takes out about 1/6 to 1/5 of the outer structure knocking down the safety factor significantly (id say about 1.2 ish, ... maybe)

Then you have about 10,000 gallons of jet fuel spill out across the floor of the building on fire and heating steel beams to around 500 F ... the most intense heat being at the point where the plane went through the building due to sufficient oxidization ... that also happens to be where the structure would be its weakest ... the fire heated up the steel support structure (and trust me steel becomes pretty malleable at relatively low temperatures) and the safety factor dropped below 1 and the building crashed ...

Edited by: Assaultman67

Sorry, what jet fuel? It's WTC7, isn't it?

just jet fuel? you have any ideas how hot it was?
i heard from multiple people who where in the construction world that the towers collapsed due the beams being so hot they became soft
soft in the sense the they just bended
that and what assaultman said, it just fell under its own weight

(ps: i didn't see the videos, no sound at school >_>)

Please, get back to the SUBJECT of the thread.

WTC7, not WTC1 or WTC2. ONLY WTC7.

@Sigma, apart from the vid containing a bit of the interview with Larry Silverstein, you don't need sound. ;-)

The debris from the airliner crashes and collapse of both WTC1 and WTC2 burned practically unchecked for nearly seven hours on exposed portions of the structure, and the collapse of WTC7 was predicted several hours prior. What remains of a conspiracy is a failure of multiple levels of government to adequately assign blame via not properly acting during and in the wake of the most extensive terrorist attack on American soil in history. People with the resources and planning to trigger the demolition of those buildings while feigning terrorist action and halting government interference probably would not include "destroy absolutely pointless structure and potentially give away our plot if a layperson can see this was a controlled demolition" within the planning.

So, yes, "simple fires" caused the collapse of WTC7 because this is plausible and demonstrable to a degree far greater than anything else.

Ahhh now i get it ... the 7 refers to the building not the "7-Seconds"

but still the point stands ... damage any building's structure ... set a fire in it ... and it won't last long ...

Edited by: Assaultman67

Vangor wrote: (...)

Unfortunately, you need to research more. Almost all reasons to invade Afghanistan/Iraq were simple lies.

You don't have much to demolish buildings, especially when you control their owner and CIA, being able to rig the buildings up.

So Vangor, you fail, you fail, because AS YET you didn't show any EVIDENCE or POINTS to show what really happened to WTC7.

@Assaultman67, you have a point, but that was concerning WTC1 & 2. ;-) Debris from there, jet fuel the more, couldn't have influenced the collapse of WTC7 in any way. Maybe dust from the debris of WTC1/WTC2, but not the debris themselves - vide the map. And the dust isn't sufficient to do something like that... but again, why were there fires if it was so far away from the ground zero?

Edited by: feillyne

I don't understand your point ... the debris circle is overlaps the 7th tower ...

also its interesting to note that the elevator housing collapses first ... simply because its an indication that there was a TON of heat that was rising up that elevator shaft

Also i want to hear a reason as to why you think the government would want to destroy that building ... not just "that building fell down! but it was less than a block away from the trade center ... this must be a Conspiracy!"

also it would be nice to see the damage from the opposite side of the building ... but i doubt you will find a video of that considering you'd have to be standing very close to where WTC 1 collapsed ...

Edited by: Assaultman67

Well, not so much debris as you'd like to expect... I don't think so little could do so much, taking the size and the way WTC7 was built.

Maybe they wanted to destroy all WTC7s, along with the 7th one, even if it was so far away.
The location of it is disturbing - it's just too far to have that kind of effect. A conspiracy theory isn't as simple as that.
Theories are theories, and this one concerning WTCs tells about reasons why US gov't could get troops to the Middle East and more. US gov't needed just an excuse to go there, everything else was prepared, quite coincidentally. That's really bugging.

Yup, a vid from the front would help a bit. Should it topple towards the ground zero if the front (towards the other WTCs) foundations were affected?

Feillyne wrote:

Vangor wrote: (...)

Unfortunately, you need to research more. Almost all reasons to invade Afghanistan/Iraq were simple lies.

Who mentioned Afghanistan/Iraq? For one, invading Afghanistan was strictly (ignoring political points of Republicans being for defensive spending) due to an effort against the spawning ground for the members of the group who perpetrated the September 11th Attacks, thus you cannot suggest this itself is a lie as evidence to support a conspiracy theory which invalidates the reason to invade Afghanistan as this is circular logic. Further, do you honestly believe September 11th was perpetrated in order to invade Iraq? The attack was conveniently used for an additional reason to invade Iraq, but creating a democratic, United States friendly nation within the Middle East while toppling a nuclear and biochemical regime were the primary reasons, despite neither being the actual reasons to invade and one being flatly a lie.

However, I do possess evidence of what occurred in WTC7 since what is demonstrable through the investigation, the official story, what was witnessed, etc., all corroborate with what is physically possible whereas I merely need the collapse of WTC7 due to burning debris to refute the baseless insinuation made when you said "what really happened".

Please, be distrustful of your government and rightly blame for failures of policies of funding extremists to wage undeclared war such as with Operation Cyclone, but seeing conspiracy in the collapse of a building which spent seven hours burning after being struck by debris gives you no platform, no does spouting "fail" like an internet kiddie.

First, I have to disbelieve you.

ae911truth.org - you think, this 1 thousand of pro's is satisfied with the 9/11 investigation, an investigation which simply ignored WTC7? Ignored. Not considered. Name it as you like - the fact remains, and remains UNSOLVED.

Why? Are you an engineer or an architect? No? Sorry, but I won't take your opinion into account. Especially if there are witnesses who say very strange things about 9/11.

What members of the group?
Haha.

Mohamed Atta - Egyptian
Waleed M. al-Shehri, Wail al-Shehri - and the rest, are either from Saudi Arabia or United Arab Emirates.

And I know that this move was against Al-Qaeda, which operates there interregionally. But why Afghanistan, not Saudi Arabia in the first place? Why? Because of Talibans? Are you kidding me?

Lies, lies. One of the reasons for U.S troops to go to Iraq, was weapons of mass destruction.
Did they find anything? ^^ No... it was a US official quoting a text selectively that Iraq had WMDs. Unfortunately, he didn't get the facts straight and forgot about that the same text said that WMDs were destroyed in previous years.

To add a cherry onto the top of this cake: why tapes showing the plane hitting Pentagon were confiscated?
Hmmm?
Why shouldn't it be a public knowledge, why should have it been concealed? Gov't has nothing to fear, if, IF, if the plane hit the Pentagon... but no, no, they couldn't show it... and the tape released doesn't show anything. And it could be faked.

Smells of liars.

Edited by: feillyne

Are you an engineer or an achitect?

I listened to INDEPENDENT engineers and architects. And they doubt the official... 'story'/version of what happened to WTCs.

But to be sincere, these planes could be hardly unmanned.
Who would kill himself, commit a suicide by taking a suicide mission, such as the one which was carried out during 9/11? Then again - did these buildings really collapse or just were demolished? NOTHING hit WTC7.

Edited by: feillyne

What's up with all of the government related videos being posted?

Are you trying to spread anarchy or something?

Anyone who isn't blind can see the massive amount of debris flying out of WTC1 when it was struck. WTC7 is a textbook case of the dangers of urban fires; having expended the entirety of local water pressure fighting fires in the main plaza (saving WTC6, by the way) a series of small fires was all that was needed to overwhelm WTC7. Anyone who lives in urban areas knows the dangers of fire in skyscrapers; it is difficult to imagine dismissing it as "a mere fire".

People are still talking about this? There are a lot of things going on that we don't know about and may be lied to about. But what can you honestly do? If you knew the truth would that really change anything? For better or for worse?

Someone wrote: Who would kill himself, commit a suicide by taking a suicide mission, such as the one which was carried out during 9/11?

Are you joking? I know you cant honestly believe that there are not people out there that will gladly sacrifice their lives for a cause they believe in.

You don't have much to demolish buildings, especially when you control their owner and CIA, being able to rig the buildings up

Yes, yes to do have much to demolish buildings, whatever that means. Do you realize how many months of preperation, planning, and the manpower it takes just to rig an (empty and completely stripped) building to implode on itself? Do you have any idea how many people used to work in those buildings and pass through the doors every single day? You may have some high value of your boss or property owner, but I know I'd start asking questions if I saw people putting explosives on every floor of the building I worked in. I'm pretty sure all those people who died that day would have too. I don't know how powerful you think the CIA is, but I don't even think an elite squad of Cobra-Ninjas could rig skyscrapers like that up without someone catching wind.

VagabondPraetor wrote: Are you an engineer or an achitect?

I am. (well sort of)

but yea ... i would take Vangor's word with a bit more weight ... from all the posts he's made id say hes a pretty intelligent guy ...

Edited by: Assaultman67

@jrjellybeans, yes, more anarchy and more HONEST officials from the middle class, the cause of the REAL equality; not some crazy shit, a war of the elite against the middle class and the poor, which is waged right now.

The pyramid will fall.

Cryrid wrote: Yes, yes to do have much to demolish buildings, whatever that means. Do you realize how many months of preperation, planning, and the manpower it takes just to rig an (empty and completely stripped) building to implode on itself? (...)

Oh, sure, first, WTC7 had CIA quarters there.
Second, you don't need that much to help implode a burning building. Especially if you know every single detail.

You underrate the value of intel! = /

But that doesn't mean they rigged something up.

L0K wrote: People are still talking about this? There are a lot of things going on that we don't know about and may be lied to about. But what can you honestly do? If you knew the truth would that really change anything? For better or for worse?

Are you joking? I know you cant honestly believe that there are not people out there that will gladly sacrifice their lives for a cause they believe in.

Still.

The significance of the truth doesn't matter much: what matters, is the pure facts. Would you like to be lied to instead being taught by your teachers? Would you like to educate yourself completely wrong or in a harmful way for you (i.e. learnt nothing)? No?

The importance of the truth, especially scientific, IS GARGANTUAN.

It creates a healthy society if they know how to use knowledge and how to behave (KNOW, know!). And if they don't... only anarchy comes from it. Not from a lack of gov't, but from a lack of CONSCIENCE.

And probably nobody will teach you how to have a soul or a conscience. Nobody, except getting your facts right, what's called commonly the "truth". As long as there any doubts to 9/11, I won't believe in anything.

Probably the whole truth will be told in some next 50 years, as was in the case of the Vietnamese war (and others), huh? Where nobody will be charged of anything.

* * *

The effect, a historical effect of 9/11, if you learnt from lessons of history, was nevertheless:
* USA either did 9/11 themselves, or KNEW that terrorists were planning to attack WTCs, and they did nothing.
And oh... no WMDs found in Iraq... ironic.

It's clear that 9/11 funded and made the path for their war against an invisible enemy: terrorism. You no longer need to besmirch a country! You only need some terror BS and you can invade EVERYONE!

Research so called 'terrorist' attacks, and you'll see that some security services of European countries, or groups completely unrelated to Al-Qaeda or their cause or their way, are involved in terrorism. Christians. Jews. You think Muslims are evil? Think again.

Anyway: the USA found a perfect cause for slaughtering more people, and sending troops to countries, whose language or culture is HUGELY unknown to them. Even Jihad is interpreted in a twisted way, both by Christians and by some Muslims. = /

Edited by: feillyne

Assaultman67 wrote:

VagabondPraetor wrote: Are you an engineer or an achitect?

I am. (well sort of)

but yea ... i would take Vangor's word with a bit more weight ... from all the posts he's made id say hes a pretty intelligent guy ...

Really? You'll defer to someone that seems smart rather than thinking on your own? Especially with you having a background in engineering / architecture, I would expect some original thought on the matter.

Zeitgeist is a veritable work of yellow journalism, but I agree that the 9/11 commission didn't satisfactorily answer all of the questions. WTC7's collapse and the discovery of nanothermite at Ground Zero, especially, have not been adequately answered in my eyes.

San-J wrote: ... Really? You'll defer to someone that seems smart rather than thinking on your own? Especially with you having a background in engineering / architecture, I would expect some original thought on the matter.

Well to be fair Vangor (if i remember correctly) is a physicist ... so hes not stupid ... also i kinda was thinking that before he posted ...

And I'm 3/4th my way through a mechanical engineering degree ... I could probably do a fairly reasonable analysis of whether or not WTC 7 came down via explosives or from damage and fire, but it would require some serious calculations ... I'd need alot of blueprints of the building, descriptions of damage to the building from external sources and a general knowledge of what was in the building (how hot the fires could get) + more stuff that i wouldn't even know about untill after i started ...

And in the end its 1000000x easier to say "he's probably right" ... thats kinda the crap part of engineering, you do alot of math that ends up backing common sense conclusions.

But technically this is slightly out of my field anyway ... "engineering" is a really broad spectrum ... this is more in the realm of civil engineering, however, its probably a little closer to this particular application than being an architect ...

Edit: honestly, if I were trying to bring a building down without getting caught ... I wouldn't use loud explosives ... that pretty much the biggest part that debunks the explosives theory ... i don't know of an effective explosive you can't hear ...

Edited by: Assaultman67

None of this matters. If in 50 years it comes out that we Americans did decide to kill 3,000+ of our own civilians and 28 billions dollars in collateral damage, plus increase our deficiet to 56 trillion dollars (After interest) on an 8+ year war, then by that time nobody but old men sitting around in their wheel chairs will care.

Ignorance is bliss, my friend.

^ That is sadly true ... LOL

San-J wrote: ... Zeitgeist is a veritable work of yellow journalism, but I agree that the 9/11 commission didn't satisfactorily answer all of the questions. WTC7's collapse and the discovery of nanothermite at Ground Zero, especially, have not been adequately answered in my eyes.

Do you know what thermite is? ... its quite literally a combination of iron rust and aluminum ...

(no idea what the "nano" means ... because "really small" thermite doesn't sound like an actual substance )

Edited by: Assaultman67

@Assaultman67, hmmmm, it'd be good to research it.

Wouldn't all the data about WTC7 be accessible?

@L0K, tell scientists that "ignorance is bliss".
No.
Facts equal knowledge. Knowledge equals resources benefiting mankind.
'Political'/historical facts are valuable, too.

Edited by: feillyne