A third tower fell on 9/11

[mikey3000]

Rethink 911

There is new interest to rethink 911. Do you think it is necessary or do you still believe the official story of the U.S. government?

http://rethink911.org/

 

[rareboy]

We've been over this so many times, you'd think that the ridiculous conspiracy theories of WTC7 would be dead and buried by now.

The forensic analysis of the collapse of this building actually pinpointed the exact connection that finally failed after this buikding had been burning uncontrolled for hours.

Its final collapse is a text book case of how a building with a wildly eccentric structure would, in fact fail.

Somewhere in this thread is the link to the final study results.

Look it up.

After you take the tinfoil off your head.

 

[rareboy]

Here it is

The thread topic was about the third tower, Building 7. There is no mystery about this. http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

This is a field that I know enough about that I can assure all the doubters out there that the building performed exactly as expected after failure of a key structural element.

In simple easy to understand terms:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/engineering/architecture/4278874

Or:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center

It failed because of thermal stress that weakened the steel connection.

 

[NotHardUp1]

^ Man, are you serious? Do you realize how many civil liberties you've lost because of 9/11? Look it up.

That's terrible logic.

Cell phones have created short attention spans, rude manners, social disconnection, and promoted a perpetual ennui. Must be world-wide conspiracy to control the masses.

Overeating in North America has caused runaway obesity in the US, Mexico, and central Canada. Must be the medical industry guaranteeing job security and growth.

Latino immigration to the US has continued with the government's tacit tolerance encouragement, despite public statements to the contrary. The employment of illegal aliens in menial labor industries across the spectrum continues. Must be a white conspiracy to displace blacks and create a Latino underclass that is less hostile historically. Of course!

Flat earth. It spreads out for miles and miles.

 

[gsdx]

That's terrible logic.

There is no logic when one's own 'evidence' proves that he is wrong.

Still, I suppose it's easier to believe in conspiracy theories than it is to do a little homework and learn the truth about how utterly impossible a planned implosion would have been.

 

[mikey3000]

Nope. Normal office fire would not cause the steel to weaken, and now 3000+ architects and engineers around the world call bullshit to the the Popular Mechanics explanation.

https://www.ae911truth.org/

 

[gsdx]

^ You posted a video a long time ago about this. I proved to you (by showing the unedited video) that it did not happen the way you believe it happened. And you still haven't studied up on the impossibility of planned implosions. Absolutely impossible. Completely, totally, and utterly impossible.

There is no evidence to support your conspiracy theory except imagination.

 

[mikey3000]

Dude, what are you talking about? You proved nothing of the kind.

 

[fabulouslyghetto]

Nope. Normal office fire would not cause the steel to weaken

Is that what you think this was? A normal office fire? What kind of office do you work in?

 

[NotHardUp1]

Nope. Normal office fire would not cause the steel to weaken, and now 3000+ architects and engineers around the world call bullshit to the the Popular Mechanics explanation.

https://www.ae911truth.org/

The fiery collapse of buildings on this scale, and the ancillary effects, is unprecedented. Architects can opine ad nauseum, but it's not like anyone can conduct experiments to scale, testing the thermodynamics in reality.

You can also get scientists all over the world to join flat Earth societies, but they are just as wrong as conspiracy theorists of every stripe.

The Father of Lies has too easy a job nowadays. Fools rush in.

 

[rareboy]

Nope. Normal office fire would not cause the steel to weaken, and now 3000+ architects and engineers around the world call bullshit to the the Popular Mechanics explanation.

https://www.ae911truth.org/

To begin with, it wasn't a normal office fire. And yes, the heat from the combustible load in the building is more than enough to weaken steel. It is why steel must be protected with a one to three hour non-combustible material. It is why high rise buildings are sprinkled....but once the sprinkler system is disabled by catastrophic impact and the fireproofing is exposed to temperatures above 300C for as many hours as this structure was...it is going to fail.

Hot finished carbon steel begins to lose strength at temperatures above 300°C and reduces in strength at steady rate up to 800°C. The small residual strength then reduces more gradually until the melting temperature at around 1500°C. This behaviour is similar for hot rolled reinforcing steels.

In actual fact, steel begins to deform at about 300C and as it deforms, will place considerable stress on connection points.



So yes, it is very possible.

I don't know what qualifications you have to declare that a 'normal' office fire couldn't weaken steel, but it is pretty easy to find information.

It is apparent that many of the architects who have signed the petition must have skipped their lectures on the behaviour of steel structures under thermal loading.

I also see a lot of mechanical, electrical and even software engineers on the list....so I wouldn't put too much faith in their opinion on the matter either. They are probably a grab-bag of conspiracy obsessed theorists just like you.

But believe what you will. Just because you have the interest in seeing the investigation re-opened, doesn't mean that there actually is a lot of interest.

I would like to see the study re-visited as well. In order to hopefully shut the conspiracy theorists up for a while.

 

[rareboy]

You might want to read this paper.

https://ws680.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=917821

 

[gsdx]

Dude, what are you talking about? You proved nothing of the kind.

My apologies. It's been so long I mixed up the buildings. You posted a video of another smaller building which had collapsed and it was edited video you offered of evidence.

Still, I just watched video of Tower 7 and I'm still telling you that it was NOT an planned implosion.

If you would do a little homework, you would see that it takes months and sometimes years to plan prepare the buildings for these things. It takes months of almost complete destruction of parts of the building to accomplish. Everybody in New York City would have known about it many months in advance. It's certainly not something which could have been planned and initiated after the planes hit the towers, and it certainly couldn't have been planned and initiated before. The detcord would not have survived the planes crashing into the towers and the explosives would not have exploded without the detcord.

Simple science. No conspiracy.

Implosions are not something that can be hid from the public.

 

[mikey3000]

That is the point of THOUSANDS of architects and engineers, no plane hit WTC 7. No jet fuel, no structural damage, just regular office material fire as per the official government report. But the owner of the building admitted that the decision was made to "pull" the building, and down it came just hours after the other two were hit. And you are right, it takes months of planning to implode such a massive building in such a manner. So how can this happen?

 

[NotHardUp1]

It takes months to do it in a precise, controlled way. I'm sure firefighters and such have access to a down-and-dirty technology to raze a building when an emergency arises.

 

[mikey3000]

WTC 7 was a 47 storey office building the size of a city block. You really think the fire dept. could pull a building of that size in such a precise manner? Did you even watch the video?

 

[rareboy]

That is the point of THOUSANDS of architects and engineers, no plane hit WTC 7. No jet fuel, no structural damage, just regular office material fire as per the official government report. But the owner of the building admitted that the decision was made to "pull" the building, and down it came just hours after the other two were hit. And you are right, it takes months of planning to implode such a massive building in such a manner. So how can this happen?

You have two very important pieces of information wrong or clearly misunderstood.

Firstly, the plan I posted above shows where the building was hit by a significant chunk of the collapsing North Tower, which ignited multiple fires that burned for hours. It didn't have to be hit by a plane. If you understood fire, you would know that once it is out of control, it feeds on itself. And if you ever want to watch what happens to an office full of wood, plastics, carpet and paper once the fire is out of control, set your place alight one day and stand back. You'll see how hot it gets.

Secondly, the 'Pull It' nonsense is just that. Silverstein was referring to a Contingent of firefighters. This has been clarified multiple times.

 

[mikey3000]

Wait! What? I was replying to the spiel that gsdx gave, not yours, unless it was you.. who.. wrote it...hmm...

Anyway, the official story the investigation presents is that the north and south towers collapsed due to the very high temperatures of burning jet fuel, and that the fires in WTC 7 were just ordinary, combustible office material. That is the official conclusion. The two types fires burn at very different temperatures. Also it was the owner of WTC 7, Larry Silverstein, who made the decision to pull it after consulting the fire dept. Do you think the fire dept. has the authority or the ability to bring down such a massive structure with just hours notice?

 

[rareboy]

You aren't reading a thing that I've written are you?

You still don't understand the properties of steel and how the design of the structures led to the collapse....not the very high temperatures of jet fuels. All the jet fuel had to do with it was the accelerated rate of failure.

And no one 'brought down' WTC 7. It came down itself. The failure is an almost textbook case of collapse once the connection that gave way is identified.

You are using a total lack of knowledge and refusal to understand the physics of the event to cling to nonsensical conspiracy theories because they somehow are more satisfying than the simple truth to you.

It must be mentally exhausting believing all this garbage conspiracy nonsense.

 

[gsdx]

Silverstein clarified the meaning of 'pull it' 13 years ago. The term 'pull it' does not exist in demolition circles. 'Pull it' means 'get the people out'.