Started By
Message

re: Tucker Goes There With WTC Building 7 Discussion

Posted on 5/1/23 at 8:42 pm to
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
57425 posts
Posted on 5/1/23 at 8:42 pm to
quote:

I'm not a structural engineer.
So what? Understanding basic load paths isn't very difficult. Many carpenters can undertsnd it quite well.

quote:

That is why I provided a link to some, in fact many.
Sorry, I only sone one to a pilot organization that says "We do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time" muchness supplies any structural theory of why they wouldn't expect a vertical failure of the buildings.

That said, if you read and understand the links you speak of... why can't you offer your own opinion?
Posted by Breauxsif
Member since May 2012
22290 posts
Posted on 5/1/23 at 8:46 pm to
quote:

Lakeboy doesn't question what he's told to believe.

“Ukraine has killed over 200,000 Russian invaders. 20,000 Russian KIA in Bakhmut alone, since December. We have to keep the proxy war going, US funding is working. Slava Ukraini!!”

-Lakeboy
Posted by Crimson1st
Birmingham, AL
Member since Nov 2010
20266 posts
Posted on 5/1/23 at 8:49 pm to
quote:

Poor guy, on top of the world one day and pandering to droolers the next.


Whatever Lameboy3.50…by the way if it wasn’t for the droolers, the psych-ward facilities you frequent wouldn’t get near as much funding.
Posted by jimmy the leg
Member since Aug 2007
34558 posts
Posted on 5/1/23 at 8:58 pm to
quote:

Number of Posts: 6 Registered on: 5/1/2023


Posted by Bluefin
The Banana Stand
Member since Apr 2011
13266 posts
Posted on 5/1/23 at 8:58 pm to
Call me crazy but I always thought WTC 7 collapsed because a GIANT CHUNK of the building was missing.

Posted by Schleynole
Member since Sep 2022
460 posts
Posted on 5/1/23 at 9:15 pm to
quote:

Why would you expect it to fail laterally?

I'll give you the 1st two but that doesn't explain why the 3rd one fell at free fall speed.
Posted by HorseShoeHenry
Member since Jul 2021
307 posts
Posted on 5/1/23 at 9:34 pm to
quote:

You asked for evidence. I have you evidence.


If you ever see ANYTHING posted by this user claiming it is "evidence", you can dismiss it without a second thought.

However, feel free to read about it if you feel you need a good laugh!
Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
124246 posts
Posted on 5/2/23 at 4:04 am to
quote:

My mother, who is a metallurgist, says the fuel and fires could not burn hot enough to affect the metal structure of the building.
Don't do that to your mother. A metallurgist would know structural steel begins to weaken at 800°F. Above 1100°F the weakening can be catastrophic. At ~2500°F, steel melts.

Jet fuel burns at between 1500°F and 2700°F.

So anyone who says the fuel and fires could not burn hot enough to affect the metal structure of the building is a dummy. You don't want to tag your mom with that. Now go apologize to her.
Posted by LaMigra
Member since Nov 2022
1199 posts
Posted on 5/2/23 at 4:35 am to
quote:

What I don't understand is how one single plane can destroy a building that size in such a short amount of time?


Not surprised at all that you don’t understand it………after having red your posts here on this site!! Lol
Posted by Schleynole
Member since Sep 2022
460 posts
Posted on 5/2/23 at 7:52 am to
quote:

Call me crazy but I always thought WTC 7 collapsed because a GIANT CHUNK of the building was missing.

The entire building?
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
119062 posts
Posted on 5/2/23 at 8:30 am to
quote:

Yet, as these simple examples illustrate, what we received instead was a report that began with a conclusion and that brazenly dismissed the observable facts in order to reach it.

Specifically, these observable facts include:

Burnt-out fires: The fires in the northeast corner of the 12th floor of WTC 7 had burnt out more than an hour before the collapse occurred. NIST’s collapse scenario requires the fires to have been present at the time of the initiating local failure.

98th floor collapse initiation: The 98th floor of the North Tower, where NIST acknowledges the collapse began, sustained hardly any damage from the airplane impact. The widespread dislodgment of fireproofing that NIST claims was essential to initiating the collapse could not have taken place on that floor.

The antenna’s movement: The antenna on the North Tower dropped first. This means the building’s core failed before the exterior did — contrary to NIST’s collapse scenario.

Uneven, discontinuous destruction: The observed sequence of the South Tower’s destruction was not continuous and therefore not compatible with the “crush down” phase of Bažant’s theory.

Once faced with these facts, which are instant non-starters for NIST’s collapse scenarios, one does not even have to agree with the controlled demolition hypothesis to concede that the official reports are incorrect and that a new forensic investigation is needed.

Through their own errors and the blatant omissions in their report, the officials at NIST crafted these silver bullets themselves, allowing independent researchers to shoot massive holes through their work. While it’s satisfying to highlight these silver bullets, in the end all that matters is that the American people deserve better.


Silver Bullets: Four Easily Observed Facts that Strike the NIST Reports Dead in Their Tracks
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
119062 posts
Posted on 5/2/23 at 8:35 am to
quote:

Don't do that to your mother. A metallurgist would know structural steel begins to weaken at 800°F. Above 1100°F the weakening can be catastrophic. At ~2500°F, steel melts.



The NIST theory is that the heat form the fires expanded the metal beams beyond the girders that supported them, then they collapsed. The problem with this NIST theory, the fires in building 7 were out an hour before collapse.
Posted by Timeoday
Easter Island
Member since Aug 2020
9140 posts
Posted on 5/2/23 at 8:37 am to
quote:

Don't do that to your mother. A metallurgist would know structural steel begins to weaken at 800°F. Above 1100°F the weakening can be catastrophic. At ~2500°F, steel melts.


So what. Less than 1/8th of that building was on fire.
Yet, it fell at free fall speed!!

Thermite in the ashes .....

Posted by LookSquirrel
Member since Oct 2019
6008 posts
Posted on 5/2/23 at 9:01 am to
Simple diagram of the official conclusion of the sham 911 commission.



Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
124246 posts
Posted on 5/2/23 at 5:58 pm to
quote:

So what. Less than 1/8th of that building was on fire.

There were between 77,000 TONS (WTC1) and 150,000 TONS (WTC2) of material directly collapsing (with inertia) onto each individual floor beneath. An additional 4500 TONS or 9 MILLION POUNDS were added to the collapsing mass for each subsequent floor that imploded.
Posted by LookSquirrel
Member since Oct 2019
6008 posts
Posted on 5/2/23 at 6:31 pm to
quote:

There were between 77,000 TONS (WTC1) and 150,000 TONS (WTC2) of material directly collapsing (with inertia) onto each individual floor beneath. An additional 4500 TONS or 9 MILLION POUNDS were added to the collapsing mass for each subsequent floor that imploded.


Pretty amazing when you think about it. They could not have fallen more neatly into their own footprint if it was an expertly planned demolition.

What are the odds?

All three buildings fell perfectly. Commercial demolition experts still have problems with grain silos.
Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
124246 posts
Posted on 5/2/23 at 6:43 pm to
quote:

Pretty amazing when you think about it
Physics is an amazing field.
Posted by Little Trump
Florida
Member since Nov 2017
5817 posts
Posted on 5/2/23 at 6:49 pm to
quote:

So what happened?


Ask any General Contractor specializing in building demolitions

Building 7 was an obvious controlled demolition
Posted by nealnan8
Atlanta
Member since Oct 2016
1694 posts
Posted on 5/2/23 at 6:55 pm to
After the first World Trade Center bombings in 1993, the Federal Government agreed to be the underwriter for all terrorism claims, letting insurance companies off the hook in case of future terrorism claims. Because of this, your average business and home owners policies included terrorism as a covered peril.
There was nothing unusual about a business owner having a policy that covered terrorism.
Posted by berrycajun
Baton Rouge
Member since May 2016
6907 posts
Posted on 5/2/23 at 6:58 pm to
I still want to know what happened at MGM in Vegas at that country Concert
first pageprev pagePage 7 of 8Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram