If It's Bad.....Jews Did It

[Phoenall]

d

What you wont see is the steel structure was manufactured to take a static load bearing in a downwards direction of the calculated maximum weight plus a safety factor of 10%. This was calculated across the whole area even though the main support structure was in the central column of lift shafts. If any one of those central columns was to give the whole weighjt of the building would exceed the safety margin for the rest of the buildings central structure. This combined with the heat from the aviation fuel fires would compound the problem and the steel would explode as it reached critical temperature.

I have seen nothing of exploded steel but plenty about the collapse of heat-weakened supports.

That is what happens when the steel is weakened with heat, the maths and science is very complex but imagine a forest fire and all the animals running away from the fire. Well that is what happens to the inclusions in the steel when they run away from the source of the heat. This leaves a very brittle poor quality cast iron that cant take the weight, so it explodes as a closed can of soup does when heated. It is not an explosion as in dynamite or plastic, but the sound and effects are the same. I saw a stainless steel plate explode into millions of needles when the water cooling was not set right, we were collecting them for 6 months after

Key findings include:

• Floor sagging and exposure to high temperatures caused the perimeter columns to bow inward and buckle—a process that spread across the faces of the buildings.
• Even though the jet fuel on the planes burned off in the first few minutes after impact, there was enough office furniture to sustain intense fires for at least an hour.
• The original builders of the twin towers and those who later renovated the structures did not have a clear technical standard for deciding on how much insulation to use around the structural beams, many of which gave way in the intense heat.

Don't forget the effect of the lift shafts acting as venturi's and drawing air under pressure from the ground levels which acted as a blast furnace acts. This created a high pressure air current that added more and more oxygen to the fire, increasing the temperature. Remember the bunsen burner used in the labs at school, and how you could control the heat by opening ports at the bottom.

dont foget fire fighters reach the 79 th floor reporting small fires and people stood in the impact hole awaiting rescue

And no one reported seeing any sign of explosive being attached to the central core, so your point being what ?

 

[Phoenall]

Key findings include:

• Floor sagging and exposure to high temperatures caused the perimeter columns to bow inward and buckle—a process that spread across the faces of the buildings.
• Even though the jet fuel on the planes burned off in the first few minutes after impact, there was enough office furniture to sustain intense fires for at least an hour.
• The original builders of the twin towers and those who later renovated the structures did not have a clear technical standard for deciding on how much insulation to use around the structural beams, many of which gave way in the intense heat.

the case of the Twin Towers NIST only gives a theory of collapse initiation and never even attempts to explain the proceeding rapid collapse

Because they were bought of by the Building Contractors. The steel failed catastrophically because its load bearing was exceeded by an enormous factor. Watch the videos and you will see the steel shattering under the force of the increasing weight suddenly dropping on it. Much as a rope will hold your weight while a steady force is applied, but snatch load it and it snaps.

 

[Phoenall]

What you wont see is the steel structure was manufactured to take a static load bearing in a downwards direction of the calculated maximum weight plus a safety factor of 10%. This was calculated across the whole area even though the main support structure was in the central column of lift shafts. If any one of those central columns was to give the whole weighjt of the building would exceed the safety margin for the rest of the buildings central structure. This combined with the heat from the aviation fuel fires would compound the problem and the steel would explode as it reached critical temperature.

I have seen nothing of exploded steel but plenty about the collapse of heat-weakened supports.

That is what happens when the steel is weakened with heat, the maths and science is very complex but imagine a forest fire and all the animals running away from the fire. Well that is what happens to the inclusions in the steel when they run away from the source of the heat. This leaves a very brittle poor quality cast iron that cant take the weight, so it explodes as a closed can of soup does when heated. It is not an explosion as in dynamite or plastic, but the sound and effects are the same. I saw a stainless steel plate explode into millions of needles when the water cooling was not set right, we were collecting them for 6 months after

LOL

See you cant even understand a simple explanation, so resort to immature retorts.

 

[eots]

NISTs forensic testing of wtc steel showed no signs of the temperatures sufficient to weaken steel

That's a typical 9/11 CT lie necessitated by the fact that the truth just doesn't support their CT silliness.

It as quote is from the former NIST CHIEF FIRE INVESTIGATOR..you are calling him a typical liar /CT ?...on what basis

No ... I'm calling you a liar. Quintiere is not a 9/11 foil-hatter and specifically said he is not a supporter of theories that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives but rather he had problems with NIST's research methodology. Quintiere, who left the NIST back in the 1990s (well before the 9/11 attack on America by your Jihadi brethren) never said their "forensic testing of wtc steel showed no signs of the temperatures sufficient to weaken steel" as you claim. As already mentioned, your lying is necessitated by the fact that the truth just doesn't support your CT silliness. Quintiere has had 8 years to substantiate his doubts about the NIST report. Do you have any follow up studies or scholarly papers on the matter from the good doctor?
Here are the pesky answers to your questions that were published well after his doubts.

Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation

How did the fires cause WTC 7 to collapse?
The heat from the uncontrolled fires caused steel floor beams and girders to thermally expand, leading to a chain of events that caused a key structural column to fail. The failure of this structural column then initiated a fire-induced progressive collapse of the entire building.

According to the report's probable collapse sequence, heat from the uncontrolled fires caused thermal expansion of the steel beams on the lower floors of the east side of WTC 7, damaging the floor framing on multiple floors.

Eventually, a girder on Floor 13 lost its connection to a critical column, Column 79, that provided support for the long floor spans on the east side of the building (see Diagram 1). The displaced girder and other local fire-induced damage caused Floor 13 to collapse, beginning a cascade of floor failures down to the 5th floor. Many of these floors had already been at least partially weakened by the fires in the vicinity of Column 79. This collapse of floors left Column 79 insufficiently supported in the east-west direction over nine stories.

The unsupported Column 79 then buckled and triggered an upward progression of floor system failures that reached the building's east penthouse. What followed in rapid succession was a series of structural failures. Failure first occurred all the way to the roof line-involving all three interior columns on the easternmost side of the building (79, 80, 81). Then, progressing from east to west across WTC 7, all of the columns failed in the core of the building (58 through 78). Finally, the entire façade collapsed.

why do paste a summary of the wtc 7 collapse ? you probably do not even understand. according to NIST a kid with a pack of matches could cause the collapse of wtc 7 Quintiere without quesrion states NISTs forensic testing of wtc steel showed no signs of the temperatures sufficient to weaken steel and I provided the link btw ..you seem to be confusing the towers with wtc 7

Changing the criteria now are we, as everyone knows WTC7 was brought down because it was dangerous

how was it dangerous and who brought it down ?

 

[Phoenall]

That's a typical 9/11 CT lie necessitated by the fact that the truth just doesn't support their CT silliness.

It as quote is from the former NIST CHIEF FIRE INVESTIGATOR..you are calling him a typical liar /CT ?...on what basis

No ... I'm calling you a liar. Quintiere is not a 9/11 foil-hatter and specifically said he is not a supporter of theories that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives but rather he had problems with NIST's research methodology. Quintiere, who left the NIST back in the 1990s (well before the 9/11 attack on America by your Jihadi brethren) never said their "forensic testing of wtc steel showed no signs of the temperatures sufficient to weaken steel" as you claim. As already mentioned, your lying is necessitated by the fact that the truth just doesn't support your CT silliness. Quintiere has had 8 years to substantiate his doubts about the NIST report. Do you have any follow up studies or scholarly papers on the matter from the good doctor?
Here are the pesky answers to your questions that were published well after his doubts.

Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation

How did the fires cause WTC 7 to collapse?
The heat from the uncontrolled fires caused steel floor beams and girders to thermally expand, leading to a chain of events that caused a key structural column to fail. The failure of this structural column then initiated a fire-induced progressive collapse of the entire building.

According to the report's probable collapse sequence, heat from the uncontrolled fires caused thermal expansion of the steel beams on the lower floors of the east side of WTC 7, damaging the floor framing on multiple floors.

Eventually, a girder on Floor 13 lost its connection to a critical column, Column 79, that provided support for the long floor spans on the east side of the building (see Diagram 1). The displaced girder and other local fire-induced damage caused Floor 13 to collapse, beginning a cascade of floor failures down to the 5th floor. Many of these floors had already been at least partially weakened by the fires in the vicinity of Column 79. This collapse of floors left Column 79 insufficiently supported in the east-west direction over nine stories.

The unsupported Column 79 then buckled and triggered an upward progression of floor system failures that reached the building's east penthouse. What followed in rapid succession was a series of structural failures. Failure first occurred all the way to the roof line-involving all three interior columns on the easternmost side of the building (79, 80, 81). Then, progressing from east to west across WTC 7, all of the columns failed in the core of the building (58 through 78). Finally, the entire façade collapsed.

why do paste a summary of the wtc 7 collapse ? you probably do not even understand. according to NIST a kid with a pack of matches could cause the collapse of wtc 7 Quintiere without quesrion states NISTs forensic testing of wtc steel showed no signs of the temperatures sufficient to weaken steel and I provided the link btw ..you seem to be confusing the towers with wtc 7

Once again you spin like a whirling dervish and there is absolute evidence that the WTC fires, coupled with the impact of a large, fast moving passenger plane were sufficient to weaken the steel supports. Additionally you failed to address the difference between your silliness and Dr Quintiere's frustration with NIST methodology ... he, like me, finds your pre-planted explosives theory to be CTBS. BTW, fully 8 years have passed since his comments. Do you have any scholarly studies performed by Quintiere which prove or disprove his 2007 doubts?

NIST methodology was completly flawed dr Q was correct... there was no evidence of temperatures required in forensic testing to initiate failure... and again he is correct.. drQ made no direct statement on pre-planted explosives theory to be CTBS that was an editoral comment by the writer and not in quote however... Quintiere did say...Dr. Quintiere, one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. “I hope to convince you to perhaps become 'Conspiracy Theorists', but in a proper way,”
and also said...
“In my opinion, the WTC investigation by NIST falls short of expectations by not definitively finding cause, by not sufficiently linking recommendations of specificity to cause, by not fully invoking all of their authority to seek facts in the investigation, and by the guidance of government lawyers to deter rather than develop fact finding.
And also said...
Dr. Quintiere said he originally “had high hopes” that NIST would do a good job with the investigation.“They’re the central government lab for fire. There are good people there and they can do a good job.But what I also thought they would do is to enlist the service of the ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives], which has an investigation force and a laboratory of their own for fire.And I thought they would put people out on the street and get gumshoe-type information.What prevented all of this?I think it’s the legal structure that cloaks the Commerce Department and therefore NIST.And so, instead of lawyers as if they were acting on a civil case trying to get depositions and information subpoenaed, those lawyers did the opposite and blocked everything.”
Article Former Chief of NIST s Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation OpEdNews

And any metallurgist will tell you that the aviation fuel would generate sufficient heat to cause the valence bonds to fail. A simple experiment that every welder and car mechanic knows about, weld two sheets together and then flex the joint. The steel will give either side of the weld because the valence bonds are weakened by the heat of welding, the simple task of heating the steel slowly will stop this from happening as the valence bonds don't migrate away from the heat source.

 

[Phoenall]

That's a typical 9/11 CT lie necessitated by the fact that the truth just doesn't support their CT silliness.

It as quote is from the former NIST CHIEF FIRE INVESTIGATOR..you are calling him a typical liar /CT ?...on what basis

No ... I'm calling you a liar. Quintiere is not a 9/11 foil-hatter and specifically said he is not a supporter of theories that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives but rather he had problems with NIST's research methodology. Quintiere, who left the NIST back in the 1990s (well before the 9/11 attack on America by your Jihadi brethren) never said their "forensic testing of wtc steel showed no signs of the temperatures sufficient to weaken steel" as you claim. As already mentioned, your lying is necessitated by the fact that the truth just doesn't support your CT silliness. Quintiere has had 8 years to substantiate his doubts about the NIST report. Do you have any follow up studies or scholarly papers on the matter from the good doctor?
Here are the pesky answers to your questions that were published well after his doubts.

Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation

How did the fires cause WTC 7 to collapse?
The heat from the uncontrolled fires caused steel floor beams and girders to thermally expand, leading to a chain of events that caused a key structural column to fail. The failure of this structural column then initiated a fire-induced progressive collapse of the entire building.

According to the report's probable collapse sequence, heat from the uncontrolled fires caused thermal expansion of the steel beams on the lower floors of the east side of WTC 7, damaging the floor framing on multiple floors.

Eventually, a girder on Floor 13 lost its connection to a critical column, Column 79, that provided support for the long floor spans on the east side of the building (see Diagram 1). The displaced girder and other local fire-induced damage caused Floor 13 to collapse, beginning a cascade of floor failures down to the 5th floor. Many of these floors had already been at least partially weakened by the fires in the vicinity of Column 79. This collapse of floors left Column 79 insufficiently supported in the east-west direction over nine stories.

The unsupported Column 79 then buckled and triggered an upward progression of floor system failures that reached the building's east penthouse. What followed in rapid succession was a series of structural failures. Failure first occurred all the way to the roof line-involving all three interior columns on the easternmost side of the building (79, 80, 81). Then, progressing from east to west across WTC 7, all of the columns failed in the core of the building (58 through 78). Finally, the entire façade collapsed.

why do paste a summary of the wtc 7 collapse ? you probably do not even understand. according to NIST a kid with a pack of matches could cause the collapse of wtc 7 Quintiere without quesrion states NISTs forensic testing of wtc steel showed no signs of the temperatures sufficient to weaken steel and I provided the link btw ..you seem to be confusing the towers with wtc 7

Changing the criteria now are we, as everyone knows WTC7 was brought down because it was dangerous

how was it dangerous and who brought it down ?

It had suffered structural faults due to the collapse of the other buildings so the US government demolished it before it could fall down and injure other people.

 

[eots]

Key findings include:

• Floor sagging and exposure to high temperatures caused the perimeter columns to bow inward and buckle—a process that spread across the faces of the buildings.
• Even though the jet fuel on the planes burned off in the first few minutes after impact, there was enough office furniture to sustain intense fires for at least an hour.
• The original builders of the twin towers and those who later renovated the structures did not have a clear technical standard for deciding on how much insulation to use around the structural beams, many of which gave way in the intense heat.

the case of the Twin Towers NIST only gives a theory of collapse initiation and never even attempts to explain the proceeding rapid collapse

Because they were bought of by the Building Contractors. The steel failed catastrophically because its load bearing was exceeded by an enormous factor. Watch the videos and you will see the steel shattering under the force of the increasing weight suddenly dropping on it. Much as a rope will hold your weight while a steady force is applied, but snatch load it and it snaps.

 

[eots]

It as quote is from the former NIST CHIEF FIRE INVESTIGATOR..you are calling him a typical liar /CT ?...on what basis

No ... I'm calling you a liar. Quintiere is not a 9/11 foil-hatter and specifically said he is not a supporter of theories that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives but rather he had problems with NIST's research methodology. Quintiere, who left the NIST back in the 1990s (well before the 9/11 attack on America by your Jihadi brethren) never said their "forensic testing of wtc steel showed no signs of the temperatures sufficient to weaken steel" as you claim. As already mentioned, your lying is necessitated by the fact that the truth just doesn't support your CT silliness. Quintiere has had 8 years to substantiate his doubts about the NIST report. Do you have any follow up studies or scholarly papers on the matter from the good doctor?
Here are the pesky answers to your questions that were published well after his doubts.

Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation

How did the fires cause WTC 7 to collapse?
The heat from the uncontrolled fires caused steel floor beams and girders to thermally expand, leading to a chain of events that caused a key structural column to fail. The failure of this structural column then initiated a fire-induced progressive collapse of the entire building.

According to the report's probable collapse sequence, heat from the uncontrolled fires caused thermal expansion of the steel beams on the lower floors of the east side of WTC 7, damaging the floor framing on multiple floors.

Eventually, a girder on Floor 13 lost its connection to a critical column, Column 79, that provided support for the long floor spans on the east side of the building (see Diagram 1). The displaced girder and other local fire-induced damage caused Floor 13 to collapse, beginning a cascade of floor failures down to the 5th floor. Many of these floors had already been at least partially weakened by the fires in the vicinity of Column 79. This collapse of floors left Column 79 insufficiently supported in the east-west direction over nine stories.

The unsupported Column 79 then buckled and triggered an upward progression of floor system failures that reached the building's east penthouse. What followed in rapid succession was a series of structural failures. Failure first occurred all the way to the roof line-involving all three interior columns on the easternmost side of the building (79, 80, 81). Then, progressing from east to west across WTC 7, all of the columns failed in the core of the building (58 through 78). Finally, the entire façade collapsed.

why do paste a summary of the wtc 7 collapse ? you probably do not even understand. according to NIST a kid with a pack of matches could cause the collapse of wtc 7 Quintiere without quesrion states NISTs forensic testing of wtc steel showed no signs of the temperatures sufficient to weaken steel and I provided the link btw ..you seem to be confusing the towers with wtc 7

Once again you spin like a whirling dervish and there is absolute evidence that the WTC fires, coupled with the impact of a large, fast moving passenger plane were sufficient to weaken the steel supports. Additionally you failed to address the difference between your silliness and Dr Quintiere's frustration with NIST methodology ... he, like me, finds your pre-planted explosives theory to be CTBS. BTW, fully 8 years have passed since his comments. Do you have any scholarly studies performed by Quintiere which prove or disprove his 2007 doubts?

NIST methodology was completly flawed dr Q was correct... there was no evidence of temperatures required in forensic testing to initiate failure... and again he is correct.. drQ made no direct statement on pre-planted explosives theory to be CTBS that was an editoral comment by the writer and not in quote however... Quintiere did say...Dr. Quintiere, one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. “I hope to convince you to perhaps become 'Conspiracy Theorists', but in a proper way,”
and also said...
“In my opinion, the WTC investigation by NIST falls short of expectations by not definitively finding cause, by not sufficiently linking recommendations of specificity to cause, by not fully invoking all of their authority to seek facts in the investigation, and by the guidance of government lawyers to deter rather than develop fact finding.
And also said...
Dr. Quintiere said he originally “had high hopes” that NIST would do a good job with the investigation.“They’re the central government lab for fire. There are good people there and they can do a good job.But what I also thought they would do is to enlist the service of the ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives], which has an investigation force and a laboratory of their own for fire.And I thought they would put people out on the street and get gumshoe-type information.What prevented all of this?I think it’s the legal structure that cloaks the Commerce Department and therefore NIST.And so, instead of lawyers as if they were acting on a civil case trying to get depositions and information subpoenaed, those lawyers did the opposite and blocked everything.”
Article Former Chief of NIST s Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation OpEdNews

And any metallurgist will tell you that the aviation fuel would generate sufficient heat to cause the valence bonds to fail. A simple experiment that every welder and car mechanic knows about, weld two sheets together and then flex the joint. The steel will give either side of the weld because the valence bonds are weakened by the heat of welding, the simple task of heating the steel slowly will stop this from happening as the valence bonds don't migrate away from the heat source.

babble...fuel burned off at impact .. how did it collapse with symmetry,,how did it collapse in secs..what happened to the central core

 

[eots]

It as quote is from the former NIST CHIEF FIRE INVESTIGATOR..you are calling him a typical liar /CT ?...on what basis

No ... I'm calling you a liar. Quintiere is not a 9/11 foil-hatter and specifically said he is not a supporter of theories that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives but rather he had problems with NIST's research methodology. Quintiere, who left the NIST back in the 1990s (well before the 9/11 attack on America by your Jihadi brethren) never said their "forensic testing of wtc steel showed no signs of the temperatures sufficient to weaken steel" as you claim. As already mentioned, your lying is necessitated by the fact that the truth just doesn't support your CT silliness. Quintiere has had 8 years to substantiate his doubts about the NIST report. Do you have any follow up studies or scholarly papers on the matter from the good doctor?
Here are the pesky answers to your questions that were published well after his doubts.

Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation

How did the fires cause WTC 7 to collapse?
The heat from the uncontrolled fires caused steel floor beams and girders to thermally expand, leading to a chain of events that caused a key structural column to fail. The failure of this structural column then initiated a fire-induced progressive collapse of the entire building.

According to the report's probable collapse sequence, heat from the uncontrolled fires caused thermal expansion of the steel beams on the lower floors of the east side of WTC 7, damaging the floor framing on multiple floors.

Eventually, a girder on Floor 13 lost its connection to a critical column, Column 79, that provided support for the long floor spans on the east side of the building (see Diagram 1). The displaced girder and other local fire-induced damage caused Floor 13 to collapse, beginning a cascade of floor failures down to the 5th floor. Many of these floors had already been at least partially weakened by the fires in the vicinity of Column 79. This collapse of floors left Column 79 insufficiently supported in the east-west direction over nine stories.

The unsupported Column 79 then buckled and triggered an upward progression of floor system failures that reached the building's east penthouse. What followed in rapid succession was a series of structural failures. Failure first occurred all the way to the roof line-involving all three interior columns on the easternmost side of the building (79, 80, 81). Then, progressing from east to west across WTC 7, all of the columns failed in the core of the building (58 through 78). Finally, the entire façade collapsed.

why do paste a summary of the wtc 7 collapse ? you probably do not even understand. according to NIST a kid with a pack of matches could cause the collapse of wtc 7 Quintiere without quesrion states NISTs forensic testing of wtc steel showed no signs of the temperatures sufficient to weaken steel and I provided the link btw ..you seem to be confusing the towers with wtc 7

Changing the criteria now are we, as everyone knows WTC7 was brought down because it was dangerous

how was it dangerous and who brought it down ?

It had suffered structural faults due to the collapse of the other buildings so the US government demolished it before it could fall down and injure other people.

then why the cover up ?

 

[eots]

 

[Phoenall]

Key findings include:

• Floor sagging and exposure to high temperatures caused the perimeter columns to bow inward and buckle—a process that spread across the faces of the buildings.
• Even though the jet fuel on the planes burned off in the first few minutes after impact, there was enough office furniture to sustain intense fires for at least an hour.
• The original builders of the twin towers and those who later renovated the structures did not have a clear technical standard for deciding on how much insulation to use around the structural beams, many of which gave way in the intense heat.

the case of the Twin Towers NIST only gives a theory of collapse initiation and never even attempts to explain the proceeding rapid collapse

Because they were bought of by the Building Contractors. The steel failed catastrophically because its load bearing was exceeded by an enormous factor. Watch the videos and you will see the steel shattering under the force of the increasing weight suddenly dropping on it. Much as a rope will hold your weight while a steady force is applied, but snatch load it and it snaps.

Electrical design has nothing to do with structural design, in fat many electrical designers have had to redo their designs when they breached code to shave the costs. Silly things like notching a load bearing beam to run electrical conduits in many places, rather that run around the load bearing beam.

He knows nothing about the stress loading of steel beams. So now you are clutching at straws

 

[eots]

Key findings include:

• Floor sagging and exposure to high temperatures caused the perimeter columns to bow inward and buckle—a process that spread across the faces of the buildings.
• Even though the jet fuel on the planes burned off in the first few minutes after impact, there was enough office furniture to sustain intense fires for at least an hour.
• The original builders of the twin towers and those who later renovated the structures did not have a clear technical standard for deciding on how much insulation to use around the structural beams, many of which gave way in the intense heat.

the case of the Twin Towers NIST only gives a theory of collapse initiation and never even attempts to explain the proceeding rapid collapse

Because they were bought of by the Building Contractors. The steel failed catastrophically because its load bearing was exceeded by an enormous factor. Watch the videos and you will see the steel shattering under the force of the increasing weight suddenly dropping on it. Much as a rope will hold your weight while a steady force is applied, but snatch load it and it snaps.

Electrical design has nothing to do with structural design, in fat many electrical designers have had to redo their designs when they breached code to shave the costs. Silly things like notching a load bearing beam to run electrical conduits in many places, rather that run around the load bearing beam.

He knows nothing about the stress loading of steel beams. So now you are clutching at straws

you are clutching at straws..I could post highly qualified structural engineers willing to stake thier reputations` all day and you would just chirp more nonsense

 

[Phoenall]

No ... I'm calling you a liar. Quintiere is not a 9/11 foil-hatter and specifically said he is not a supporter of theories that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives but rather he had problems with NIST's research methodology. Quintiere, who left the NIST back in the 1990s (well before the 9/11 attack on America by your Jihadi brethren) never said their "forensic testing of wtc steel showed no signs of the temperatures sufficient to weaken steel" as you claim. As already mentioned, your lying is necessitated by the fact that the truth just doesn't support your CT silliness. Quintiere has had 8 years to substantiate his doubts about the NIST report. Do you have any follow up studies or scholarly papers on the matter from the good doctor?
Here are the pesky answers to your questions that were published well after his doubts.

Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation

How did the fires cause WTC 7 to collapse?
The heat from the uncontrolled fires caused steel floor beams and girders to thermally expand, leading to a chain of events that caused a key structural column to fail. The failure of this structural column then initiated a fire-induced progressive collapse of the entire building.

According to the report's probable collapse sequence, heat from the uncontrolled fires caused thermal expansion of the steel beams on the lower floors of the east side of WTC 7, damaging the floor framing on multiple floors.

Eventually, a girder on Floor 13 lost its connection to a critical column, Column 79, that provided support for the long floor spans on the east side of the building (see Diagram 1). The displaced girder and other local fire-induced damage caused Floor 13 to collapse, beginning a cascade of floor failures down to the 5th floor. Many of these floors had already been at least partially weakened by the fires in the vicinity of Column 79. This collapse of floors left Column 79 insufficiently supported in the east-west direction over nine stories.

The unsupported Column 79 then buckled and triggered an upward progression of floor system failures that reached the building's east penthouse. What followed in rapid succession was a series of structural failures. Failure first occurred all the way to the roof line-involving all three interior columns on the easternmost side of the building (79, 80, 81). Then, progressing from east to west across WTC 7, all of the columns failed in the core of the building (58 through 78). Finally, the entire façade collapsed.

why do paste a summary of the wtc 7 collapse ? you probably do not even understand. according to NIST a kid with a pack of matches could cause the collapse of wtc 7 Quintiere without quesrion states NISTs forensic testing of wtc steel showed no signs of the temperatures sufficient to weaken steel and I provided the link btw ..you seem to be confusing the towers with wtc 7

Once again you spin like a whirling dervish and there is absolute evidence that the WTC fires, coupled with the impact of a large, fast moving passenger plane were sufficient to weaken the steel supports. Additionally you failed to address the difference between your silliness and Dr Quintiere's frustration with NIST methodology ... he, like me, finds your pre-planted explosives theory to be CTBS. BTW, fully 8 years have passed since his comments. Do you have any scholarly studies performed by Quintiere which prove or disprove his 2007 doubts?

NIST methodology was completly flawed dr Q was correct... there was no evidence of temperatures required in forensic testing to initiate failure... and again he is correct.. drQ made no direct statement on pre-planted explosives theory to be CTBS that was an editoral comment by the writer and not in quote however... Quintiere did say...Dr. Quintiere, one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. “I hope to convince you to perhaps become 'Conspiracy Theorists', but in a proper way,”
and also said...
“In my opinion, the WTC investigation by NIST falls short of expectations by not definitively finding cause, by not sufficiently linking recommendations of specificity to cause, by not fully invoking all of their authority to seek facts in the investigation, and by the guidance of government lawyers to deter rather than develop fact finding.
And also said...
Dr. Quintiere said he originally “had high hopes” that NIST would do a good job with the investigation.“They’re the central government lab for fire. There are good people there and they can do a good job.But what I also thought they would do is to enlist the service of the ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives], which has an investigation force and a laboratory of their own for fire.And I thought they would put people out on the street and get gumshoe-type information.What prevented all of this?I think it’s the legal structure that cloaks the Commerce Department and therefore NIST.And so, instead of lawyers as if they were acting on a civil case trying to get depositions and information subpoenaed, those lawyers did the opposite and blocked everything.”
Article Former Chief of NIST s Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation OpEdNews

And any metallurgist will tell you that the aviation fuel would generate sufficient heat to cause the valence bonds to fail. A simple experiment that every welder and car mechanic knows about, weld two sheets together and then flex the joint. The steel will give either side of the weld because the valence bonds are weakened by the heat of welding, the simple task of heating the steel slowly will stop this from happening as the valence bonds don't migrate away from the heat source.

babble...fuel burned off at impact .. how did it collapse with symmetry,,how did it collapse in secs..what happened to the central core

Already explained it was the fault of the designers sticking to code and allowing no leeway for a sudden impact. The fuel might have burnt of but the high temperatures and latent heat are enough to cause the valence bonds to fail. It was the central core that went as that is where the heat was directed by the updraught ( Bunsen burner remember ). Once one central support gave way the remaining ones were over their maximum loading and the steel being under compression heated through work until they gave. Once that happened the full weight of the floors above plus their kinetic energy plus the angular motion ( Newtons laws ) created a shock loading of many trillions of tons over and above the design parameters. With this being the central core the building collapsed in on itself ( fill a plastic bottle or metal can with steam, seal it and drop it in cold water for an example ). As each floor gave way the speed and inertia increased along with the mass and kinetic energy until more than one floor gave under the increasing weight

 

[eots]

why do paste a summary of the wtc 7 collapse ? you probably do not even understand. according to NIST a kid with a pack of matches could cause the collapse of wtc 7 Quintiere without quesrion states NISTs forensic testing of wtc steel showed no signs of the temperatures sufficient to weaken steel and I provided the link btw ..you seem to be confusing the towers with wtc 7

Once again you spin like a whirling dervish and there is absolute evidence that the WTC fires, coupled with the impact of a large, fast moving passenger plane were sufficient to weaken the steel supports. Additionally you failed to address the difference between your silliness and Dr Quintiere's frustration with NIST methodology ... he, like me, finds your pre-planted explosives theory to be CTBS. BTW, fully 8 years have passed since his comments. Do you have any scholarly studies performed by Quintiere which prove or disprove his 2007 doubts?

NIST methodology was completly flawed dr Q was correct... there was no evidence of temperatures required in forensic testing to initiate failure... and again he is correct.. drQ made no direct statement on pre-planted explosives theory to be CTBS that was an editoral comment by the writer and not in quote however... Quintiere did say...Dr. Quintiere, one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. “I hope to convince you to perhaps become 'Conspiracy Theorists', but in a proper way,”
and also said...
“In my opinion, the WTC investigation by NIST falls short of expectations by not definitively finding cause, by not sufficiently linking recommendations of specificity to cause, by not fully invoking all of their authority to seek facts in the investigation, and by the guidance of government lawyers to deter rather than develop fact finding.
And also said...
Dr. Quintiere said he originally “had high hopes” that NIST would do a good job with the investigation.“They’re the central government lab for fire. There are good people there and they can do a good job.But what I also thought they would do is to enlist the service of the ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives], which has an investigation force and a laboratory of their own for fire.And I thought they would put people out on the street and get gumshoe-type information.What prevented all of this?I think it’s the legal structure that cloaks the Commerce Department and therefore NIST.And so, instead of lawyers as if they were acting on a civil case trying to get depositions and information subpoenaed, those lawyers did the opposite and blocked everything.”
Article Former Chief of NIST s Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation OpEdNews

And any metallurgist will tell you that the aviation fuel would generate sufficient heat to cause the valence bonds to fail. A simple experiment that every welder and car mechanic knows about, weld two sheets together and then flex the joint. The steel will give either side of the weld because the valence bonds are weakened by the heat of welding, the simple task of heating the steel slowly will stop this from happening as the valence bonds don't migrate away from the heat source.

babble...fuel burned off at impact .. how did it collapse with symmetry,,how did it collapse in secs..what happened to the central core

Already explained it was the fault of the designers sticking to code and allowing no leeway for a sudden impact. The fuel might have burnt of but the high temperatures and latent heat are enough to cause the valence bonds to fail. It was the central core that went as that is where the heat was directed by the updraught ( Bunsen burner remember ). Once one central support gave way the remaining ones were over their maximum loading and the steel being under compression heated through work until they gave. Once that happened the full weight of the floors above plus their kinetic energy plus the angular motion ( Newtons laws ) created a shock loading of many trillions of tons over and above the design parameters. With this being the central core the building collapsed in on itself ( fill a plastic bottle or metal can with steam, seal it and drop it in cold water for an example ). As each floor gave way the speed and inertia increased along with the mass and kinetic energy until more than one floor gave under the increasing weight

 

[aris2chat]

Key findings include:

• Floor sagging and exposure to high temperatures caused the perimeter columns to bow inward and buckle—a process that spread across the faces of the buildings.
• Even though the jet fuel on the planes burned off in the first few minutes after impact, there was enough office furniture to sustain intense fires for at least an hour.
• The original builders of the twin towers and those who later renovated the structures did not have a clear technical standard for deciding on how much insulation to use around the structural beams, many of which gave way in the intense heat.

the case of the Twin Towers NIST only gives a theory of collapse initiation and never even attempts to explain the proceeding rapid collapse

Because they were bought of by the Building Contractors. The steel failed catastrophically because its load bearing was exceeded by an enormous factor. Watch the videos and you will see the steel shattering under the force of the increasing weight suddenly dropping on it. Much as a rope will hold your weight while a steady force is applied, but snatch load it and it snaps.

Electrical design has nothing to do with structural design, in fat many electrical designers have had to redo their designs when they breached code to shave the costs. Silly things like notching a load bearing beam to run electrical conduits in many places, rather that run around the load bearing beam.

He knows nothing about the stress loading of steel beams. So now you are clutching at straws

There is the weight of the plane, the movement from the impact, heat not just from the fuel but all manner of furniture, paper, chemicals, etc. that each create differing impact on the fire.

It was a cascade of events that lead to the collapse. Once the collapse began the pressure, gases, acted like a bellow making the fire even hotter. The impact weakened the structure, fire weakened the metal just enough (melting was not necessary). The speed with which the collapse happened might have taken many by surprise, the collapse itself was inevitable. Thankfully the collapse went straight down and not sideways spreading the damage even further.

Think about how long the fires went one and how many firefighter were involved. The heat that mangled and twisted beams, not melting to liquidification.

enough with all the CT.

 

[Phoenall]

Key findings include:

• Floor sagging and exposure to high temperatures caused the perimeter columns to bow inward and buckle—a process that spread across the faces of the buildings.
• Even though the jet fuel on the planes burned off in the first few minutes after impact, there was enough office furniture to sustain intense fires for at least an hour.
• The original builders of the twin towers and those who later renovated the structures did not have a clear technical standard for deciding on how much insulation to use around the structural beams, many of which gave way in the intense heat.

the case of the Twin Towers NIST only gives a theory of collapse initiation and never even attempts to explain the proceeding rapid collapse

Because they were bought of by the Building Contractors. The steel failed catastrophically because its load bearing was exceeded by an enormous factor. Watch the videos and you will see the steel shattering under the force of the increasing weight suddenly dropping on it. Much as a rope will hold your weight while a steady force is applied, but snatch load it and it snaps.

Electrical design has nothing to do with structural design, in fat many electrical designers have had to redo their designs when they breached code to shave the costs. Silly things like notching a load bearing beam to run electrical conduits in many places, rather that run around the load bearing beam.

He knows nothing about the stress loading of steel beams. So now you are clutching at straws

you are clutching at straws..I could post highly qualified structural engineers willing to stake thier reputations` all day and you would just chirp more nonsense

Then do so and watch them get ripped to pieces. How many on the unions working on the World Trade Centre were under the control of organised crime bosses. How many companies were fronts for money laundering, how many inspectors were in debt through gambling or had secrets. As I said an electrical engineer does not need to know about stress tolerances, he just needs to know about the flow of electrons and what attenuation factors the long runs will make

 

[eots]

Key findings include:

• Floor sagging and exposure to high temperatures caused the perimeter columns to bow inward and buckle—a process that spread across the faces of the buildings.
• Even though the jet fuel on the planes burned off in the first few minutes after impact, there was enough office furniture to sustain intense fires for at least an hour.
• The original builders of the twin towers and those who later renovated the structures did not have a clear technical standard for deciding on how much insulation to use around the structural beams, many of which gave way in the intense heat.

the case of the Twin Towers NIST only gives a theory of collapse initiation and never even attempts to explain the proceeding rapid collapse

Because they were bought of by the Building Contractors. The steel failed catastrophically because its load bearing was exceeded by an enormous factor. Watch the videos and you will see the steel shattering under the force of the increasing weight suddenly dropping on it. Much as a rope will hold your weight while a steady force is applied, but snatch load it and it snaps.

Electrical design has nothing to do with structural design, in fat many electrical designers have had to redo their designs when they breached code to shave the costs. Silly things like notching a load bearing beam to run electrical conduits in many places, rather that run around the load bearing beam.

He knows nothing about the stress loading of steel beams. So now you are clutching at straws

There is the weight of the plane, the movement from the impact, heat not just from the fuel but all manner of furniture, paper, chemicals, etc. that each create differing impact on the fire.

It was a cascade of events that lead to the collapse. Once the collapse began the pressure, gases, acted like a bellow making the fire even hotter. The impact weakened the structure, fire weakened the metal just enough (melting was not necessary). The speed with which the collapse happened might have taken many by surprise, the collapse itself was inevitable. Thankfully the collapse went straight down and not sideways spreading the damage even further.

Think about how long the fires went one and how many firefighter were involved. The heat that mangled and twisted beams, not melting to liquidification.

enough with all the CT.

firefighters reached the 79 floor reported small fires..victims stood in the impact hole ..where is all this fire ?

 

[eots]

 

[Phoenall]

Once again you spin like a whirling dervish and there is absolute evidence that the WTC fires, coupled with the impact of a large, fast moving passenger plane were sufficient to weaken the steel supports. Additionally you failed to address the difference between your silliness and Dr Quintiere's frustration with NIST methodology ... he, like me, finds your pre-planted explosives theory to be CTBS. BTW, fully 8 years have passed since his comments. Do you have any scholarly studies performed by Quintiere which prove or disprove his 2007 doubts?

NIST methodology was completly flawed dr Q was correct... there was no evidence of temperatures required in forensic testing to initiate failure... and again he is correct.. drQ made no direct statement on pre-planted explosives theory to be CTBS that was an editoral comment by the writer and not in quote however... Quintiere did say...Dr. Quintiere, one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. “I hope to convince you to perhaps become 'Conspiracy Theorists', but in a proper way,”
and also said...
“In my opinion, the WTC investigation by NIST falls short of expectations by not definitively finding cause, by not sufficiently linking recommendations of specificity to cause, by not fully invoking all of their authority to seek facts in the investigation, and by the guidance of government lawyers to deter rather than develop fact finding.
And also said...
Dr. Quintiere said he originally “had high hopes” that NIST would do a good job with the investigation.“They’re the central government lab for fire. There are good people there and they can do a good job.But what I also thought they would do is to enlist the service of the ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives], which has an investigation force and a laboratory of their own for fire.And I thought they would put people out on the street and get gumshoe-type information.What prevented all of this?I think it’s the legal structure that cloaks the Commerce Department and therefore NIST.And so, instead of lawyers as if they were acting on a civil case trying to get depositions and information subpoenaed, those lawyers did the opposite and blocked everything.”
Article Former Chief of NIST s Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation OpEdNews

And any metallurgist will tell you that the aviation fuel would generate sufficient heat to cause the valence bonds to fail. A simple experiment that every welder and car mechanic knows about, weld two sheets together and then flex the joint. The steel will give either side of the weld because the valence bonds are weakened by the heat of welding, the simple task of heating the steel slowly will stop this from happening as the valence bonds don't migrate away from the heat source.

babble...fuel burned off at impact .. how did it collapse with symmetry,,how did it collapse in secs..what happened to the central core

Already explained it was the fault of the designers sticking to code and allowing no leeway for a sudden impact. The fuel might have burnt of but the high temperatures and latent heat are enough to cause the valence bonds to fail. It was the central core that went as that is where the heat was directed by the updraught ( Bunsen burner remember ). Once one central support gave way the remaining ones were over their maximum loading and the steel being under compression heated through work until they gave. Once that happened the full weight of the floors above plus their kinetic energy plus the angular motion ( Newtons laws ) created a shock loading of many trillions of tons over and above the design parameters. With this being the central core the building collapsed in on itself ( fill a plastic bottle or metal can with steam, seal it and drop it in cold water for an example ). As each floor gave way the speed and inertia increased along with the mass and kinetic energy until more than one floor gave under the increasing weight

Just as the WTC did as each floor collapsed, the building stayed still for a split second before collapsing again, and again and again and again each pause getting shorter as the inertia overcame the stress loading. The two cars analogy is wrong in this instance as they are close in mass and inertia. More relevant would be an extremely heavy and fast train hitting a car, and taking 1 mile to stop.

Here it is happening



Notice the flames from the inferno inside at 9 minutes after the impact then again 15 minutes after.




Now the only possible explosive that could have caused the collapse would have nitro glycerine based, and the shock of the plane hitting the building would have triggered an explosion. NO EXPLOSION.

 

[Phoenall]

the case of the Twin Towers NIST only gives a theory of collapse initiation and never even attempts to explain the proceeding rapid collapse

Because they were bought of by the Building Contractors. The steel failed catastrophically because its load bearing was exceeded by an enormous factor. Watch the videos and you will see the steel shattering under the force of the increasing weight suddenly dropping on it. Much as a rope will hold your weight while a steady force is applied, but snatch load it and it snaps.

Electrical design has nothing to do with structural design, in fat many electrical designers have had to redo their designs when they breached code to shave the costs. Silly things like notching a load bearing beam to run electrical conduits in many places, rather that run around the load bearing beam.

He knows nothing about the stress loading of steel beams. So now you are clutching at straws

There is the weight of the plane, the movement from the impact, heat not just from the fuel but all manner of furniture, paper, chemicals, etc. that each create differing impact on the fire.

It was a cascade of events that lead to the collapse. Once the collapse began the pressure, gases, acted like a bellow making the fire even hotter. The impact weakened the structure, fire weakened the metal just enough (melting was not necessary). The speed with which the collapse happened might have taken many by surprise, the collapse itself was inevitable. Thankfully the collapse went straight down and not sideways spreading the damage even further.

Think about how long the fires went one and how many firefighter were involved. The heat that mangled and twisted beams, not melting to liquidification.

enough with all the CT.

firefighters reached the 79 floor reported small fires..victims stood in the impact hole ..where is all this fire ?

Look at the video's I have uploaded and see the inferno inside the WTC 9 minutes and 15 minutes after impact. Flames hot enough to melt glass and soften steel. The impact would be strong enough to trigger any explosives embedded in the central core, or even the heat generated which would burn the explosives before they could be triggered.