- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
A Non-Conspiracy explanation to the collapse of WTC building 7
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:35 am
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:35 am
LINK
taken from the NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) report NCSTAR1-A: Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7
full report linked above for your viewing.
It is a secure document so i could not copy/paste out of adobe, so im posting the pictures.
taken from the NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) report NCSTAR1-A: Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7
full report linked above for your viewing.
It is a secure document so i could not copy/paste out of adobe, so im posting the pictures.
10
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:42 am to Displaced
I don't know man it still collapsed as if it had imploded. We will never truly know.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:50 am to Displaced
The loss of the WTC buildings occurred precisely as experts would have predicted for a building exposed to that kind of fire. It's just that no one expected thousands of gallons of jet fuel to find its way into the building. Fires cause steel frames to fail and the weight of the building eventually lead to collapse. It's really not that difficult.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:50 am to Displaced
I cant read that on my phone, but I'm going with the "raghead hit it with a plane" theory
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:51 am to Displaced
This thread will quickly devolve into shite.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:52 am to HooDooWitch
quote:
I cant read that on my phone, but I'm going with the "raghead hit it with a plane" theory
Not building 7... well, not directly.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:53 am to PuntBamaPunt
quote:
This thread will quickly devolve into shite.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:54 am to HooDooWitch
it was interesting to see the building fall somewhat controlled from such an unexpected and unplanned explosion.
THe part above the fire could have fallen to the side instead of strait down like it did. Probably would have killed a lot more poeple.
THe part above the fire could have fallen to the side instead of strait down like it did. Probably would have killed a lot more poeple.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:57 am to TeddyPadillac
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:59 am to TeddyPadillac
quote:
THe part above the fire could have fallen to the side instead of strait down like it did. Probably would have killed a lot more poeple.
Read the report.
The floors failed due to fire.
Then the weight of failure was driven by gravity straight down.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:02 am to White Shadeaux
I am aware of what the report said and how it fell strait down.
The design of the building aided in falling strait down as well.
All i'm saying is it could have been much worse had the top of the building fallen differently.
The design of the building aided in falling strait down as well.
All i'm saying is it could have been much worse had the top of the building fallen differently.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:02 am to jrodLSUke
quote:
The loss of the WTC buildings occurred precisely as experts would have predicted for a building exposed to that kind of fire. It's just that no one expected thousands of gallons of jet fuel to find its way into the building. Fires cause steel frames to fail and the weight of the building eventually lead to collapse. It's really not that difficult.
WTC 7 was not hit by a plane.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:08 am to TeddyPadillac
How should this tower, or any tower, fall from the events that happened?
Or is it conspiracy theorist belief that intense fire does not weaken steel?
Or is it conspiracy theorist belief that intense fire does not weaken steel?
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:09 am to White Shadeaux
quote:
Then the weight of failure was driven by gravity straight down
As opposed to the other gravity
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:11 am to TeddyPadillac
quote:
strait
I hate to be that guy, but you've used it several times ITT.
You're looking for straight
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:11 am to Cracker
quote:
As opposed to the other gravity
the posters in this thread haven't even tackled third-grade spelling; give em a break on the physics.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:14 am to Cracker
quote:
As opposed to the other gravity
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:16 am to Displaced
What is the tin foil hat theory? The CIA/Halliburton/Illuminati carefully blew up WTC 7 hours after it had been evacuated because...oil?
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:18 am to Thib-a-doe Tiger
quote:
ITT.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:18 am to Alatgr
Exactly. It was also a fighter jet that hit WTC 2 and missile that hit the Pentagon. Where's the rest of the plane in Pennsylvania? Why was the burn mark so small?
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News