Time to put up or shut up.

[PhysicsExist]

There had to have been signs that the building was going to come down. All the firefighters knew it. Were they all in on it?

Jason Charles -- E.M.T. (E.M.S.), Battalion 13
So we started heading over to where Building 7 was at and they were like Building 7 is going to collapse, you can't go over there, this and that, and there was another building that they thought was going to collapse that was like right behind the triage center, the building that we were in.

Frank Cruthers -- Fire Chief (F.D.N.Y.)
Early on, there was concern that 7 World Trade Center might have been both impacted by the collapsing tower and had several fires in it and there was a concern that it might collapse. So we instructed that a collapse area --
...
-- be set up and maintained so that when the expected collapse of 7 happened, we wouldn't have people working in it. Thre was considerable discussion with Con Ed regarding the substation in that building and the feeders and the oil coolands and so on. And their concern was of the type of fire we might have when it collapsed

Frank Fellini -- Fire Chief (F.D.N.Y.)
The major concern at that time at that particular location was number Seven, building number seven, which had taken a big hit from the north tower. When it fell, it ripped steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the facade on Vesey Street. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing.
So for the next five or six hours we kept firefighters from working anywhere near that building, which included the whole north side of the World Trade Center complex. Eventually around 5:00 or a little after, building number seven came down.

Joseph Fortis -- E.M.T (E.M.S.), Battalion 13
When the third building came down, we were on that corner in front of the school, and everybody just stood back. They pulled us all back at the time, almost about an hour before it, because they were sure -- they knew it was going to come down, but they weren't sure. So they pulled everyone back, and everybody stood there and we actually just waited and just waited and waited until it went down, because it was unsafe.

Vincent Massa -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.), Engine 64
At this point Seven World Trade Center was going heavy, and they weren't letting anybody get too close. Everybody was expecting that to come down.
...
I remember later on in the day as we were waiting for seven to come down, they kept backing us up Vesey, almost like a full block. They were concerned about seven coming down, and they kept changing us, establishing a collapse zone and backing us up.

9-11 Research: WTC 7 Collapse Foreknowledge

Facts You Keeping Ignoring:
1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.

2) The freefall for 2.25 seconds is impossible because in a natural collapse a building would need its columns to buckle/fail

3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.

There is no rebuttal to these facts. Read this, and use your logic. We have intellect for a reason, take advantage of it. I'm not here to spread lies and waste time, I'm here to get the truth and facts out.

 

[candycorn]

There had to have been signs that the building was going to come down. All the firefighters knew it. Were they all in on it?

Jason Charles -- E.M.T. (E.M.S.), Battalion 13
So we started heading over to where Building 7 was at and they were like Building 7 is going to collapse, you can't go over there, this and that, and there was another building that they thought was going to collapse that was like right behind the triage center, the building that we were in.

Frank Cruthers -- Fire Chief (F.D.N.Y.)
Early on, there was concern that 7 World Trade Center might have been both impacted by the collapsing tower and had several fires in it and there was a concern that it might collapse. So we instructed that a collapse area --
...
-- be set up and maintained so that when the expected collapse of 7 happened, we wouldn't have people working in it. Thre was considerable discussion with Con Ed regarding the substation in that building and the feeders and the oil coolands and so on. And their concern was of the type of fire we might have when it collapsed

Frank Fellini -- Fire Chief (F.D.N.Y.)
The major concern at that time at that particular location was number Seven, building number seven, which had taken a big hit from the north tower. When it fell, it ripped steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the facade on Vesey Street. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing.
So for the next five or six hours we kept firefighters from working anywhere near that building, which included the whole north side of the World Trade Center complex. Eventually around 5:00 or a little after, building number seven came down.

Joseph Fortis -- E.M.T (E.M.S.), Battalion 13
When the third building came down, we were on that corner in front of the school, and everybody just stood back. They pulled us all back at the time, almost about an hour before it, because they were sure -- they knew it was going to come down, but they weren't sure. So they pulled everyone back, and everybody stood there and we actually just waited and just waited and waited until it went down, because it was unsafe.

Vincent Massa -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.), Engine 64
At this point Seven World Trade Center was going heavy, and they weren't letting anybody get too close. Everybody was expecting that to come down.
...
I remember later on in the day as we were waiting for seven to come down, they kept backing us up Vesey, almost like a full block. They were concerned about seven coming down, and they kept changing us, establishing a collapse zone and backing us up.

9-11 Research: WTC 7 Collapse Foreknowledge

Facts You Keeping Ignoring:
1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.

2) The freefall for 2.25 seconds is impossible because in a natural collapse a building would need its columns to buckle/fail

3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.

There is no rebuttal to these facts. Read this, and use your logic. We have intellect for a reason, take advantage of it. I'm not here to spread lies and waste time, I'm here to get the truth and facts out.

Nobody cares.

Hey the thread you started was moved. Nuff Said.

 

[DiveCon]

Facts You Keeping Ignoring:
1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.

i stopped reading after that as you are LYING
it did NOT fall at freefall speeds

 

[PhysicsExist]

There had to have been signs that the building was going to come down. All the firefighters knew it. Were they all in on it?

Jason Charles -- E.M.T. (E.M.S.), Battalion 13
So we started heading over to where Building 7 was at and they were like Building 7 is going to collapse, you can't go over there, this and that, and there was another building that they thought was going to collapse that was like right behind the triage center, the building that we were in.

Frank Cruthers -- Fire Chief (F.D.N.Y.)
Early on, there was concern that 7 World Trade Center might have been both impacted by the collapsing tower and had several fires in it and there was a concern that it might collapse. So we instructed that a collapse area --
...
-- be set up and maintained so that when the expected collapse of 7 happened, we wouldn't have people working in it. Thre was considerable discussion with Con Ed regarding the substation in that building and the feeders and the oil coolands and so on. And their concern was of the type of fire we might have when it collapsed

Frank Fellini -- Fire Chief (F.D.N.Y.)
The major concern at that time at that particular location was number Seven, building number seven, which had taken a big hit from the north tower. When it fell, it ripped steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the facade on Vesey Street. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing.
So for the next five or six hours we kept firefighters from working anywhere near that building, which included the whole north side of the World Trade Center complex. Eventually around 5:00 or a little after, building number seven came down.

Joseph Fortis -- E.M.T (E.M.S.), Battalion 13
When the third building came down, we were on that corner in front of the school, and everybody just stood back. They pulled us all back at the time, almost about an hour before it, because they were sure -- they knew it was going to come down, but they weren't sure. So they pulled everyone back, and everybody stood there and we actually just waited and just waited and waited until it went down, because it was unsafe.

Vincent Massa -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.), Engine 64
At this point Seven World Trade Center was going heavy, and they weren't letting anybody get too close. Everybody was expecting that to come down.
...
I remember later on in the day as we were waiting for seven to come down, they kept backing us up Vesey, almost like a full block. They were concerned about seven coming down, and they kept changing us, establishing a collapse zone and backing us up.

9-11 Research: WTC 7 Collapse Foreknowledge

Facts You Keeping Ignoring:
1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.

2) The freefall for 2.25 seconds is impossible because in a natural collapse a building would need its columns to buckle/fail

3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.

There is no rebuttal to these facts. Read this, and use your logic. We have intellect for a reason, take advantage of it. I'm not here to spread lies and waste time, I'm here to get the truth and facts out.

Can't handle it?

 

[DiveCon]

there was nothing to handle, dipshit

 

[Gamolon]

because the path of greatest resistance is directly under it.

And this is where you are completely incorrect.

If a COLUMN below a given mass fails due to stress, there is NO RESISTANCE from that column anymore.

PERIOD.

Hence the term "fails". Just like your posts.

You're disturbingly misinformed. Whoever explained physics to you left out the main points, like the physics part.

you state that if a "column below a given mass falls due to stress, there is no resistance from that column anymore"

First of all I said "FAILS" not "FALLS". Learn the difference.

That is a complete lie, and almost a joke. You're saying that that column DOES NOT EXIST anymore?

You really need a lesson in structural engineering and design. Here's a clue. In the structural world failed means failed. Once a component fails, it can no longer support weight. So in a sense, it's does not exist in the grand scheme of things.

That's a fact. Any structural engineer will tell you the same thing. I suggest you find one and ask exactly what "failed structural component", "redistributed loads", and "stress" mean.

 

[PhysicsExist]

there was nothing to handle, dipshit

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkqgs68A6a8[/ame]

 

[PhysicsExist]

And this is where you are completely incorrect.

If a COLUMN below a given mass fails due to stress, there is NO RESISTANCE from that column anymore.

PERIOD.

Hence the term "fails". Just like your posts.

You're disturbingly misinformed. Whoever explained physics to you left out the main points, like the physics part.

you state that if a "column below a given mass falls due to stress, there is no resistance from that column anymore"

First of all I said "FAILS" not "FALLS". Learn the difference.

That is a complete lie, and almost a joke. You're saying that that column DOES NOT EXIST anymore?

You really need a lesson in structural engineering and design. Here's a clue. In the structural world failed means failed. Once a component fails, it can no longer support weight. So in a sense, it's does not exist in the grand scheme of things.

That's a fact. Any structural engineer will tell you the same thing. I suggest you find one and ask exactly what "failed structural component", "redistributed loads", and "stress" mean.

1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.

2) The freefall for 2.25 seconds is impossible because in a natural collapse a building would need its columns to buckle/fail

3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.

 

[DiveCon]

there was nothing to handle, dipshit

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkqgs68A6a8[/ame]

i wonder how much you enjoy having eots hand up your ass?

 

[DiveCon]

You're disturbingly misinformed. Whoever explained physics to you left out the main points, like the physics part.

you state that if a "column below a given mass falls due to stress, there is no resistance from that column anymore"

First of all I said "FAILS" not "FALLS". Learn the difference.

That is a complete lie, and almost a joke. You're saying that that column DOES NOT EXIST anymore?

You really need a lesson in structural engineering and design. Here's a clue. In the structural world failed means failed. Once a component fails, it can no longer support weight. So in a sense, it's does not exist in the grand scheme of things.

That's a fact. Any structural engineer will tell you the same thing. I suggest you find one and ask exactly what "failed structural component", "redistributed loads", and "stress" mean.

1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.

2) The freefall for 2.25 seconds is impossible because in a natural collapse a building would need its columns to buckle/fail

3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.

you are a liar and a fucking idiot
it was a progressive collapse not a sudden one

 

[Gamolon]

3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.

You are COMPLETEY wrong.

When a component is stressed beyond it's load-bearing limit that component can buckle or rupture.

Here's something else you seem to be missing. Those columns were not solid pieces all the way up 47 stories. They were connected together. Those connections could have failed due to stress limits.

 

[SFC Ollie]

There had to have been signs that the building was going to come down. All the firefighters knew it. Were they all in on it?

Jason Charles -- E.M.T. (E.M.S.), Battalion 13
So we started heading over to where Building 7 was at and they were like Building 7 is going to collapse, you can't go over there, this and that, and there was another building that they thought was going to collapse that was like right behind the triage center, the building that we were in.

Frank Cruthers -- Fire Chief (F.D.N.Y.)
Early on, there was concern that 7 World Trade Center might have been both impacted by the collapsing tower and had several fires in it and there was a concern that it might collapse. So we instructed that a collapse area --
...
-- be set up and maintained so that when the expected collapse of 7 happened, we wouldn't have people working in it. Thre was considerable discussion with Con Ed regarding the substation in that building and the feeders and the oil coolands and so on. And their concern was of the type of fire we might have when it collapsed

Frank Fellini -- Fire Chief (F.D.N.Y.)
The major concern at that time at that particular location was number Seven, building number seven, which had taken a big hit from the north tower. When it fell, it ripped steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the facade on Vesey Street. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing.
So for the next five or six hours we kept firefighters from working anywhere near that building, which included the whole north side of the World Trade Center complex. Eventually around 5:00 or a little after, building number seven came down.

Joseph Fortis -- E.M.T (E.M.S.), Battalion 13
When the third building came down, we were on that corner in front of the school, and everybody just stood back. They pulled us all back at the time, almost about an hour before it, because they were sure -- they knew it was going to come down, but they weren't sure. So they pulled everyone back, and everybody stood there and we actually just waited and just waited and waited until it went down, because it was unsafe.

Vincent Massa -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.), Engine 64
At this point Seven World Trade Center was going heavy, and they weren't letting anybody get too close. Everybody was expecting that to come down.
...
I remember later on in the day as we were waiting for seven to come down, they kept backing us up Vesey, almost like a full block. They were concerned about seven coming down, and they kept changing us, establishing a collapse zone and backing us up.

9-11 Research: WTC 7 Collapse Foreknowledge

Facts You Keeping Ignoring:
1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.

2) The freefall for 2.25 seconds is impossible because in a natural collapse a building would need its columns to buckle/fail

3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.

There is no rebuttal to these facts. Read this, and use your logic. We have intellect for a reason, take advantage of it. I'm not here to spread lies and waste time, I'm here to get the truth and facts out.

No, you are ignoring the people who were there.

 

[PhysicsExist]

When a component is stressed beyond it's load-bearing limit that component can buckle or rupture.

And once it ruptures or buckles it then:

3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.

 

[SFC Ollie]

You're disturbingly misinformed. Whoever explained physics to you left out the main points, like the physics part.

you state that if a "column below a given mass falls due to stress, there is no resistance from that column anymore"

First of all I said "FAILS" not "FALLS". Learn the difference.

That is a complete lie, and almost a joke. You're saying that that column DOES NOT EXIST anymore?

You really need a lesson in structural engineering and design. Here's a clue. In the structural world failed means failed. Once a component fails, it can no longer support weight. So in a sense, it's does not exist in the grand scheme of things.

That's a fact. Any structural engineer will tell you the same thing. I suggest you find one and ask exactly what "failed structural component", "redistributed loads", and "stress" mean.

1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.

2) The freefall for 2.25 seconds is impossible because in a natural collapse a building would need its columns to buckle/fail

3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.

Um, I believe that NIST said the columns failed prior to the facade falling. So you cannot base any times off the fall of the facade as the columns were already gone, as evidenced by the fall of the penthouse.

 

[PhysicsExist]

First of all I said "FAILS" not "FALLS". Learn the difference.



You really need a lesson in structural engineering and design. Here's a clue. In the structural world failed means failed. Once a component fails, it can no longer support weight. So in a sense, it's does not exist in the grand scheme of things.

That's a fact. Any structural engineer will tell you the same thing. I suggest you find one and ask exactly what "failed structural component", "redistributed loads", and "stress" mean.

1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.

2) The freefall for 2.25 seconds is impossible because in a natural collapse a building would need its columns to buckle/fail

3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.

Um, I believe that NIST said the columns failed prior to the facade falling. So you cannot base any times off the fall of the facade as the columns were already gone, as evidenced by the fall of the penthouse.

Do you not understand that Freefall is impossible in a Natural Collapse do to the MINIMUM resistance buckled columns give off? Can you not grasp that basic concept that completely debunks the fire theory?

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rP9Qp5QWRMQ[/ame]

 

[candycorn]

There had to have been signs that the building was going to come down. All the firefighters knew it. Were they all in on it?

Jason Charles -- E.M.T. (E.M.S.), Battalion 13
So we started heading over to where Building 7 was at and they were like Building 7 is going to collapse, you can't go over there, this and that, and there was another building that they thought was going to collapse that was like right behind the triage center, the building that we were in.

Frank Cruthers -- Fire Chief (F.D.N.Y.)
Early on, there was concern that 7 World Trade Center might have been both impacted by the collapsing tower and had several fires in it and there was a concern that it might collapse. So we instructed that a collapse area --
...
-- be set up and maintained so that when the expected collapse of 7 happened, we wouldn't have people working in it. Thre was considerable discussion with Con Ed regarding the substation in that building and the feeders and the oil coolands and so on. And their concern was of the type of fire we might have when it collapsed

Frank Fellini -- Fire Chief (F.D.N.Y.)
The major concern at that time at that particular location was number Seven, building number seven, which had taken a big hit from the north tower. When it fell, it ripped steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the facade on Vesey Street. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing.
So for the next five or six hours we kept firefighters from working anywhere near that building, which included the whole north side of the World Trade Center complex. Eventually around 5:00 or a little after, building number seven came down.

Joseph Fortis -- E.M.T (E.M.S.), Battalion 13
When the third building came down, we were on that corner in front of the school, and everybody just stood back. They pulled us all back at the time, almost about an hour before it, because they were sure -- they knew it was going to come down, but they weren't sure. So they pulled everyone back, and everybody stood there and we actually just waited and just waited and waited until it went down, because it was unsafe.

Vincent Massa -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.), Engine 64
At this point Seven World Trade Center was going heavy, and they weren't letting anybody get too close. Everybody was expecting that to come down.
...
I remember later on in the day as we were waiting for seven to come down, they kept backing us up Vesey, almost like a full block. They were concerned about seven coming down, and they kept changing us, establishing a collapse zone and backing us up.

9-11 Research: WTC 7 Collapse Foreknowledge

Facts You Keeping Ignoring:
1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.

2) The freefall for 2.25 seconds is impossible because in a natural collapse a building would need its columns to buckle/fail

3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.

There is no rebuttal to these facts. Read this, and use your logic. We have intellect for a reason, take advantage of it. I'm not here to spread lies and waste time, I'm here to get the truth and facts out.

No, you are ignoring the people who were there.

That can't be stated enough. Although I did get a lot of amusement of the "I'm here to get the truth and facts out" whine.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Facts You Keeping Ignoring:
1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.

2) The freefall for 2.25 seconds is impossible because in a natural collapse a building would need its columns to buckle/fail

3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.

There is no rebuttal to these facts. Read this, and use your logic. We have intellect for a reason, take advantage of it. I'm not here to spread lies and waste time, I'm here to get the truth and facts out.

No, you are ignoring the people who were there.

That can't be stated enough. Although I did get a lot of amusement of the "I'm here to get the truth and facts out" whine.

I'm still waiting for him to make his first post containing any truth or facts.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

This is an orange...at Christmas​

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOxg8hT30r0[/ame]

 

[PhysicsExist]

1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.

2) The freefall for 2.25 seconds is impossible because in a natural collapse a building would need its columns to buckle/fail

3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.

Um, I believe that NIST said the columns failed prior to the facade falling. So you cannot base any times off the fall of the facade as the columns were already gone, as evidenced by the fall of the penthouse.

Do you not understand that Freefall is impossible in a Natural Collapse do to the MINIMUM resistance buckled columns give off? Can you not grasp that basic concept that completely debunks the fire theory?

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rP9Qp5QWRMQ[/ame]

 

[tempesta29]

You are COMPLETEY wrong.

When a component is stressed beyond it's load-bearing limit that component can buckle or rupture.

So all of the components buckled or ruptured simultaneously, and then that simultaneous rupturing or buckling repeated several times more? It was in free fall. Perhaps you're neglecting that fact. Even buckling and rupturing columns will still provide resistance. And there is no measurable deformity of WTC 7 just prior to the collapse of the northface roofline.

Here's something else you seem to be missing. Those columns were not solid pieces all the way up 47 stories. They were connected together. Those connections could have failed due to stress limits.

Right. All 80 or so columns disconnected on the same x axis, then did so again, and perhaps a couple more times. What would you estimate the probability of this happening would be? And does it matter? Do failing connections offer zero resistance to collapse?