Victims' Families Want To Air New 9/11 Truth Ad

[Gamolon]

Let it be known on these forums that you Gamolon are a coward, who avoids answering legit questions, and you are a troll that can't produce evidence as to why other building infernos burned longer and more ferociously ,causing no global collapse, nor free fall speeds, despite your adherence and claim that the OCT as laid out by NIST and the government is believable.

You are forever branded as a traitor, and a liar, who only parrots the official government conspiracy THEORY, with no regard for the rest of the nation, nor the victims of the attack. You are an enemy of all real Americans, who sides with the criminals who helped/ caused the attacks. You have disgraced yourself, beyond repair, and will forever be considered a most unreliable source to believe, and engage with on this topic, I'm sure your handlers will be most displeased with your pathetic performance in this thread and others.

You lose troll.

Let it be known that YOU, Mr. Jones are an imbecile and cannot seem to grasp the concept that different buildings will react differently to office fires based on there design as has been told to you many times.

Maybe someday when you grow up and learn something, you'll realize how stupid you really were. I can only hope, but based on your previous idiocy, there probably isn't much hope.

Talk to some structural engineers. They may set your sorry ass straight.

The STEEL motherfucker, that is what has been in question all this time!! Why don't we see thermal expansion in the other inferno fires because of this phenomena....EVER?? Or global collapse...producing free fall speeds??
You have had your ass handed to you you miserable OCTA twat
you have failed in your duty to your handlers, you are a treasonous POS.
Dance around the questions motherfucker....DANCE

Here you go you stupid fuck. Example of a total building collapse due to fire and with a steel structure.
CASE STUDY: THE KADER TOY FACTORY FIRE

The Building’s Structural Integrity
Probably the most notable difference between the Triangle and Kader fires is the effect they had on the structural integrity of the buildings involved. Even though the Triangle fire gutted the top three floors of the ten-storey factory building, the building remained structurally intact. The Kader buildings, on the other hand, collapsed relatively early in the fire because their structural steel supports lacked the fireproofing that would have allowed them to maintain their strength when exposed to high temperatures. A post-fire review of the debris at the Kader site showed no indication that any of the steel members had been fireproofed.

So why did this building collapse completely due to fire, yet your examples show that the steel either didn't collapse or partially collapsed.

Obviously steel was used in all cases and fire was involved. So what are the other factors that could have caused this total collapse of a steel building?

 

[Gamolon]

The STEEL motherfucker, that is what has been in question all this time!! Why don't we see thermal expansion in the other inferno fires because of this phenomena....EVER??

Tell you what dickhead.

You provide me the proof that there was not one iota of thermal expansion in ANY of those buildings.

Let's see your proof behind your assumption. Otherwise you're guessing. Much like you asshole cohort eots who said engineers designed buildings for thermal expansion due to office fires.

 

[Mr. Jones]

Let it be known that YOU, Mr. Jones are an imbecile and cannot seem to grasp the concept that different buildings will react differently to office fires based on there design as has been told to you many times.

Maybe someday when you grow up and learn something, you'll realize how stupid you really were. I can only hope, but based on your previous idiocy, there probably isn't much hope.

Talk to some structural engineers. They may set your sorry ass straight.

The STEEL motherfucker, that is what has been in question all this time!! Why don't we see thermal expansion in the other inferno fires because of this phenomena....EVER?? Or global collapse...producing free fall speeds??
You have had your ass handed to you you miserable OCTA twat
you have failed in your duty to your handlers, you are a treasonous POS.
Dance around the questions motherfucker....DANCE

Here you go you stupid fuck. Example of a total building collapse due to fire and with a steel structure.
CASE STUDY: THE KADER TOY FACTORY FIRE

The Building’s Structural Integrity
Probably the most notable difference between the Triangle and Kader fires is the effect they had on the structural integrity of the buildings involved. Even though the Triangle fire gutted the top three floors of the ten-storey factory building, the building remained structurally intact. The Kader buildings, on the other hand, collapsed relatively early in the fire because their structural steel supports lacked the fireproofing that would have allowed them to maintain their strength when exposed to high temperatures. A post-fire review of the debris at the Kader site showed no indication that any of the steel members had been fireproofed.

So why did this building collapse completely due to fire, yet your examples show that the steel either didn't collapse or partially collapsed.

Obviously steel was used in all cases and fire was involved. So what are the other factors that could have caused this total collapse of a steel building?

What is the difference in the steel in this fire then, say the other examples of infernos? Surely the other buildings had fireproofing no?
It also has not been proven that the planes caused all of the fireproofing to just fall off, in fact if I remember correctly, NIST did some lame test with a shotgun??

Nope, sorry this is not convincing proof from you in any way.
The fact still remains that the WTC towers should have still stood, I will even concede with a parial collapse. The 7 building is all together
too strange, as no plane hit it to blame lack of fireproofing on.

Again we are not talking about the design..it is the steel in the infernos that miraculously stayed upright in most all instances, where as the steel in the WTC..especially 7 falls like toothpicks, straight down, producing 2.25 secs. of free fall.

Keep in mind also that the fire you linked, -

"The initial fuel packages in both the Triangle and Kader fires were similar. The Triangle fire started in rag bins and quickly spread to combustible clothing and garments before involving wood furnishings, some of which were impregnated with machine oil. The initial fuel package at the Kader plant consisted of polyester and cotton fabrics, various plastics, and other materials used to manufacture stuffed toys, plastic dolls, and other related products. These are materials that can typically be ignited easily, can contribute to rapid fire growth and spread, and have a high heat release rate."

And I can't seem to find how long your fire burned?
The WTC were no 3rd world sweat shops.

 

[Gamolon]

The STEEL motherfucker, that is what has been in question all this time!! Why don't we see thermal expansion in the other inferno fires because of this phenomena....EVER?? Or global collapse...producing free fall speeds??
You have had your ass handed to you you miserable OCTA twat
you have failed in your duty to your handlers, you are a treasonous POS.
Dance around the questions motherfucker....DANCE

Here you go you stupid fuck. Example of a total building collapse due to fire and with a steel structure.
CASE STUDY: THE KADER TOY FACTORY FIRE

The Building’s Structural Integrity
Probably the most notable difference between the Triangle and Kader fires is the effect they had on the structural integrity of the buildings involved. Even though the Triangle fire gutted the top three floors of the ten-storey factory building, the building remained structurally intact. The Kader buildings, on the other hand, collapsed relatively early in the fire because their structural steel supports lacked the fireproofing that would have allowed them to maintain their strength when exposed to high temperatures. A post-fire review of the debris at the Kader site showed no indication that any of the steel members had been fireproofed.

So why did this building collapse completely due to fire, yet your examples show that the steel either didn't collapse or partially collapsed.

Obviously steel was used in all cases and fire was involved. So what are the other factors that could have caused this total collapse of a steel building?

What is the difference in the steel in this fire then, say the other examples of infernos? Surely the other buildings had fireproofing no?
It also has not been proven that the planes caused all of the fireproofing to just fall off, in fact if I remember correctly, NIST did some lame test with a shotgun??

Nope, sorry this is not convincing proof from you in any way.
The fact still remains that the WTC towers should have still stood, I will even concede with a parial collapse. The 7 building is all together
too strange, as no plane hit it to blame lack of fireproofing on.

Again we are not talking about the design..it is the steel in the infernos that miraculously stayed upright in most all instances, where as the steel in the WTC..especially 7 falls like toothpicks, straight down, producing 2.25 secs. of free fall.

Keep in mind also that the fire you linked, -

"The initial fuel packages in both the Triangle and Kader fires were similar. The Triangle fire started in rag bins and quickly spread to combustible clothing and garments before involving wood furnishings, some of which were impregnated with machine oil. The initial fuel package at the Kader plant consisted of polyester and cotton fabrics, various plastics, and other materials used to manufacture stuffed toys, plastic dolls, and other related products. These are materials that can typically be ignited easily, can contribute to rapid fire growth and spread, and have a high heat release rate."

And I can't seem to find how long your fire burned?
The WTC were no 3rd world sweat shops.

Answer a question for me Mr. Jones.

What caused the different reactions between your examples? Why did one building partially collapse and why did one building not collapse at all?

 

[Mr. Jones]

Here you go you stupid fuck. Example of a total building collapse due to fire and with a steel structure.
CASE STUDY: THE KADER TOY FACTORY FIRE



So why did this building collapse completely due to fire, yet your examples show that the steel either didn't collapse or partially collapsed.

Obviously steel was used in all cases and fire was involved. So what are the other factors that could have caused this total collapse of a steel building?

What is the difference in the steel in this fire then, say the other examples of infernos? Surely the other buildings had fireproofing no?
It also has not been proven that the planes caused all of the fireproofing to just fall off, in fact if I remember correctly, NIST did some lame test with a shotgun??

Nope, sorry this is not convincing proof from you in any way.
The fact still remains that the WTC towers should have still stood, I will even concede with a parial collapse. The 7 building is all together
too strange, as no plane hit it to blame lack of fireproofing on.

Again we are not talking about the design..it is the steel in the infernos that miraculously stayed upright in most all instances, where as the steel in the WTC..especially 7 falls like toothpicks, straight down, producing 2.25 secs. of free fall.

Keep in mind also that the fire you linked, -

"The initial fuel packages in both the Triangle and Kader fires were similar. The Triangle fire started in rag bins and quickly spread to combustible clothing and garments before involving wood furnishings, some of which were impregnated with machine oil. The initial fuel package at the Kader plant consisted of polyester and cotton fabrics, various plastics, and other materials used to manufacture stuffed toys, plastic dolls, and other related products. These are materials that can typically be ignited easily, can contribute to rapid fire growth and spread, and have a high heat release rate."

And I can't seem to find how long your fire burned?
The WTC were no 3rd world sweat shops.

Answer a question for me Mr. Jones.

What caused the different reactions between your examples? Why did one building partially collapse and why did one building not collapse at all?

What "all the different reactions"? The examples of the infernos, ALL stayed upright for the most part, and did not collapse straight down producing free fall speeds!

You talk about design and allude to that being a difference. That's not what I'm talking about, I'm talking about the steel for the hundredth time already!
Look...take a Ford explorer, and a Ford Expedition as an example.
One is larger, slightly different in design, but both use a common steel and frame rails.
Lift both off the ground on a rack..start a fire underneath both of them... for 1 hr let's say...Would ones steel rails "thermally expand" and collapse, while the other would not....despite using the same common steel?? This is what you are saying.

 

[Patriot911]

You talk about design and allude to that being a difference. That's not what I'm talking about, I'm talking about the steel for the hundredth time already!
Look...take a Ford explorer, and a Ford Expedition as an example.
One is larger, slightly different in design, but both use a common steel and frame rails.
Lift both off the ground on a rack..start a fire underneath both of them... for 1 hr let's say...Would ones steel rails "thermally expand" and collapse, while the other would not....despite using the same common steel?? This is what you are saying.

Wow. To say you are clueless is to insult clueless people everywhere! You really think the only difference in buildings is SIZE?!?!? Holy shit, dude! At this point a lobotomy could only improve your intelligence! Are you seriously so fucking stupid that you don't understand that the construction of the buildings is going to use different structures made out of steel to hold up the building? One structure may be more succeptable to fire than another due to the design. Has your little peabrain ever thought of that? Have you ever even LOOKED at the design of the WTC 7 to see just how unique it was and how it had steel structures holding up the building that were VERY unique?

Every time I think I can't possibly have less respect for you than I already have, you prove me wrong.

 

[Mr. Jones]

You talk about design and allude to that being a difference. That's not what I'm talking about, I'm talking about the steel for the hundredth time already!
Look...take a Ford explorer, and a Ford Expedition as an example.
One is larger, slightly different in design, but both use a common steel and frame rails.
Lift both off the ground on a rack..start a fire underneath both of them... for 1 hr let's say...Would ones steel rails "thermally expand" and collapse, while the other would not....despite using the same common steel?? This is what you are saying.

Wow. To say you are clueless is to insult clueless people everywhere! You really think the only difference in buildings is SIZE?!?!? Holy shit, dude! At this point a lobotomy could only improve your intelligence! Are you seriously so fucking stupid that you don't understand that the construction of the buildings is going to use different structures made out of steel to hold up the building?

It is still STEEL you dumb twat!
What was different about the steel in 7 compared to the infernos I sited? That is the question. You have many instances of actual infernos that DID NOT collapse producing free fall, AND ONLY 1 THAT DID THAT BEING 7!
So what was different about 7s steel?

One structure may be more succeptable to fire than another due to the design. Has your little peabrain ever thought of that? Have you ever even LOOKED at the design of the WTC 7 to see just how unique it was and how it had steel structures holding up the building that were VERY unique?

So you are implying that WTC 7 was a POS design, using POS steel?

Every time I think I can't possibly have less respect for you than I already have, you prove me wrong.

I ask a simple question about the steel in 7 compared to the infernos elsewhere, and you dance around it, with insults, and BS and provide zero logical answers. You really do suck at this.
So then try to answer the comparison I posed to you. 2 different trucks (buildings), same fire under both...same steel frame rails...which one will collapse with free fall speed?
One could be a 4 dr. with tow package, it doesn't matter the design, as the steel to build both is the same.
So tell us using your vast knowledge on this topic instead of using your time tested and frequently exposed troll tactics, for once.

 

[Patriot911]

It is still STEEL you dumb twat!

So you are confessing to everyone that you actually believe a steel structure configured one way should react the exact same way as every other steel structure when exposed to fire? Thanks for confirming your utter ignorance! BTW, I already showed you a building where the steel framed section of the building undeniably collapsed. A shame you have to run away from the facts.

What was different about the steel in 7 compared to the infernos I sited? That is the question.

Shit, you are one ignorant motherfucker, aren't you! Nothing is different in the steel. It is how the steel is holding up the building that matters. That is the part you insist doesn't matter, yet matters far more than anything else. The WTC 7 was a very unique design. You may badmouth the NIST report all you want, but read it. You can debate their findings, but the facts on the design of the building are beyond reproach.

You have many instances of actual infernos that DID NOT collapse producing free fall, AND ONLY 1 THAT DID THAT BEING 7!

Define many. A handful? Certainly less than 50. How many had the same circumstances as WTC 7 where the fire was started the way it was in WTC 7, not fought at all, and allowed to burn uncontested?

So what was different about 7s steel?

Read above and weap.

So you are implying that WTC 7 was a POS design, using POS steel?

Nope. Read what I say, not what you want me to say. It was a unique design that had some issues IF some highly unlikely things happened. Under normal circumstances it was a perfectly fine design. As for the quality of steel, it isn't the steel, dipshit!

Every time I think I can't possibly have less respect for you than I already have, you prove me wrong.

I ask a simple question about the steel in 7 compared to the infernos elsewhere, and you dance around it, with insults, and BS and provide zero logical answers. You really do suck at this.

Wrong yet again. The fact you're too retarded to understand the answers I and many others have given you isn't our fault. Debating with someone too stupid to qualify for the special olympics is very difficult.

So then try to answer the comparison I posed to you. 2 different trucks (buildings), same fire under both...same steel frame rails...which one will collapse with free fall speed?

Come back when you actually understand the issue. Don't keep re-displaying your utter ignorance. It is embarassing to all your fellow truthtards when one of their own displays such amazing levels of ignorance.

One could be a 4 dr. with tow package, it doesn't matter the design, as the steel to build both is the same.

Read above.

So tell us using your vast knowledge on this topic instead of using your time tested and frequently exposed troll tactics, for once.

Why should I respond to an example that has NO VALID RELATIONSHIP to the issue at hand? Just because you're a dumb fuck doesn't mean everyone else has to lower themselves to your level.

 

[Gamolon]

It is still STEEL you dumb twat!

So you are confessing to everyone that you actually believe a steel structure configured one way should react the exact same way as every other steel structure when exposed to fire? Thanks for confirming your utter ignorance! BTW, I already showed you a building where the steel framed section of the building undeniably collapsed. A shame you have to run away from the facts.

What was different about the steel in 7 compared to the infernos I sited? That is the question.

Shit, you are one ignorant motherfucker, aren't you! Nothing is different in the steel. It is how the steel is holding up the building that matters. That is the part you insist doesn't matter, yet matters far more than anything else. The WTC 7 was a very unique design. You may badmouth the NIST report all you want, but read it. You can debate their findings, but the facts on the design of the building are beyond reproach.

Amen.

 

[Mr. Jones]

It is still STEEL you dumb twat!

So you are confessing to everyone that you actually believe a steel structure configured one way should react the exact same way as every other steel structure when exposed to fire? Thanks for confirming your utter ignorance! BTW, I already showed you a building where the steel framed section of the building undeniably collapsed. A shame you have to run away from the facts.

What was different about the steel in 7 compared to the infernos I sited? That is the question.

Shit, you are one ignorant motherfucker, aren't you! Nothing is different in the steel. It is how the steel is holding up the building that matters. That is the part you insist doesn't matter, yet matters far more than anything else. The WTC 7 was a very unique design. You may badmouth the NIST report all you want, but read it. You can debate their findings, but the facts on the design of the building are beyond reproach.

Amen.

I'm not the one who started to "badmouth" the NIST, more educated and knowledgeable people have done so, and explained it to us layman in very understandable ways, that make sense without having to resort to ridiculous and far fetched, never before happened in history reasons. The CD theory explains their demise far more accurately when taking all of the available information into consideration.
I still call bullshit on your theory, steel in the examples of the infernos according to NIST and you people, should have thermally expanded to the point of free fall collapses. WTC 7 was fortified, and so much confidence was given to its design that it was the command center.
Those 3 buildings were constructed with safety factors, and they should not have come down like they did.
Much testing has been done for over 100 yrs. and the testing in Britain suggests that they should not have collapsed like they did, you are basically saying that the WTC buildings were built inappropriately using crap quality steel, and suggesting that the WTC buildings had such load designs as to allow sporadic asymmetrical fire damage cause their collapses, one producing free fall speeds at one point.
One doesn't have to be a genius to view the examples of the fires side by side to see that your theory is BS, especially taking into account the massiveness of the WTC buildings.
Bottom line is, they did not collapse the way NIST has said, and you are still helping to cover up a heinous crime on behalf of the perpetrators.
You would think when one steps back, and looks at the big picture it would give you people a reason to be concerned, but you are not, and you try to wave these very strange things away, why I'm not sure exactly but the label of disinformation "agent" sure fits you.

One more question for you...Why in no examples of other building infernos, do we see any outward ejecting of parts of the building, nor do we hear any popping sounds as they came down? Oh that's right I forgot, they DIDN'T come down or explode like the WTC towers...my bad.

 

[Gamolon]

So you are confessing to everyone that you actually believe a steel structure configured one way should react the exact same way as every other steel structure when exposed to fire? Thanks for confirming your utter ignorance! BTW, I already showed you a building where the steel framed section of the building undeniably collapsed. A shame you have to run away from the facts.


Shit, you are one ignorant motherfucker, aren't you! Nothing is different in the steel. It is how the steel is holding up the building that matters. That is the part you insist doesn't matter, yet matters far more than anything else. The WTC 7 was a very unique design. You may badmouth the NIST report all you want, but read it. You can debate their findings, but the facts on the design of the building are beyond reproach.

Amen.

I'm not the one who started to "badmouth" the NIST, more educated and knowledgeable people have done so, and explained it to us layman in very understandable ways, that make sense without having to resort to ridiculous and far fetched, never before happened in history reasons. The CD theory explains their demise far more accurately when taking all of the available information into consideration.
I still call bullshit on your theory, steel in the examples of the infernos according to NIST and you people, should have thermally expanded to the point of free fall collapses. WTC 7 was fortified, and so much confidence was given to its design that it was the command center.
Those 3 buildings were constructed with safety factors, and they should not have come down like they did.
Much testing has been done for over 100 yrs. and the testing in Britain suggests that they should not have collapsed like they did, you are basically saying that the WTC buildings were built inappropriately using crap quality steel, and suggesting that the WTC buildings had such load designs as to allow sporadic asymmetrical fire damage cause their collapses, one producing free fall speeds at one point.
One doesn't have to be a genius to view the examples of the fires side by side to see that your theory is BS, especially taking into account the massiveness of the WTC buildings.
Bottom line is, they did not collapse the way NIST has said, and you are still helping to cover up a heinous crime on behalf of the perpetrators.
You would think when one steps back, and looks at the big picture it would give you people a reason to be concerned, but you are not, and you try to wave these very strange things away, why I'm not sure exactly but the label of disinformation "agent" sure fits you.

One more question for you...Why in no examples of other building infernos, do we see any outward ejecting of parts of the building, nor do we hear any popping sounds as they came down? Oh that's right I forgot, they DIDN'T come down or explode like the WTC towers...my bad.

Can you show me these massive parts of the building being ejected sideways out of the building? Videos perhaps?

 

[Gamolon]

Tell me something Mr. Jones.

You sit here bring up the fact that no building has ever globally collapsed do to fire and provide examples. You want to know WHY the steel performed differently in those buildings than in WTC7.

SO I am asking you yet again. Why did the steel perform differently in the buildings that showed NO signs of collapse as compared to the buildings that partially collapsed.

What is the difference?

 

[eots]

Tell me something Mr. Jones.

You sit here bring up the fact that no building has ever globally collapsed do to fire and provide examples. You want to know WHY the steel performed differently in those buildings than in WTC7.

SO I am asking you yet again. Why did the steel perform differently in the buildings that showed NO signs of collapse as compared to the buildings that partially collapsed.

What is the difference?

where was the design of wtc 7 called into fault and what new building codes have been enacted as a result of the wtc 7 collapse ?

 

[Patriot911]

I'm not the one who started to "badmouth" the NIST, more educated and knowledgeable people have done so, and explained it to us layman in very understandable ways, that make sense without having to resort to ridiculous and far fetched, never before happened in history reasons.

I see. So "educated" people would never lie to ignorant fucks like you. Is that what we are suppose to believe?

The CD theory explains their demise far more accurately when taking all of the available information into consideration.

And ONLY when you completely ignore all the other facts that disprove a CD. That is the part that proves your're a lameassed retard.

I still call bullshit on your theory, steel in the examples of the infernos according to NIST and you people, should have thermally expanded to the point of free fall collapses. WTC 7 was fortified, and so much confidence was given to its design that it was the command center.

Show me where the NIST or anyone else has said all other examples of infernos should have collapsed due to thermal expansion and fallen at free fall speeds. You are such a fucking liar it is amazing everyone else doesn't call you on your repeated and very provable lies.

Those 3 buildings were constructed with safety factors, and they should not have come down like they did.

Really? They were designed to have high speed jets slam into them loaded with fuel, have buildings collapse on them, have no means to fight the fires, and have the fire suppression systems fail due to damage? MORE bullshit lies from you claiming these are covered by "safety factors". Safety factors are one thing. Designing for the absolutely unthinkable is a waste of time, money and resources. Oh, and that isn't my opinion. That is the stated opinion of the man who designed the buildings in the first place. Hard to argue with him, but I am sure you're just the kind of punk to do so.

Much testing has been done for over 100 yrs. and the testing in Britain suggests that they should not have collapsed like they did, you are basically saying that the WTC buildings were built inappropriately using crap quality steel, and suggesting that the WTC buildings had such load designs as to allow sporadic asymmetrical fire damage cause their collapses, one producing free fall speeds at one point.

And what study would that be? I already linked you the study I know about over in England. Surely you're not talking about the Arup study, are you? Because you're right. They disagreed with the NIST findings. They disagreed that the structural damage of the plane strikes had much to do with the collapse. Through their own independant study they discovered that the towers would have collapsed from the fires alone given the circumstances. So yes, they disagreed with the NIST. But they disagree with your sorry ass even more!

One doesn't have to be a genius to view the examples of the fires side by side to see that your theory is BS, especially taking into account the massiveness of the WTC buildings.

Yeah, because all geniuses know that every building should behave the EXACT SAME WAY regardless of construction, materials and circumstances! DUR!!! And now you're claiming the fact that the towers were so massive is another reason they SHOULDN'T have collapsed? My God! I'm laughing so hard I'm crying right now! Is this because you "geniuses" know that more weight obviously is less prone to collapse or what?

Bottom line is, they did not collapse the way NIST has said, and you are still helping to cover up a heinous crime on behalf of the perpetrators.

Wrong yet again, treasonous bastard!

You would think when one steps back, and looks at the big picture it would give you people a reason to be concerned, but you are not, and you try to wave these very strange things away, why I'm not sure exactly but the label of disinformation "agent" sure fits you.

So why can't you give us one piece of real evidence that your bullshit theories are in any way true? All you have is the OPINIONS of some highly questionable people while ignoring the opinions of the true experts that are highly regarded world wide. Oh, we all know of your anti-American bullshit attitudes and wanting to blame the government for all bad things. Is it because you work for Al Qaeda? Hell, if you keep blaming anyone who dares question your retarded claims of being a disinfo agent, surely that must mean you work for Al Qaeda, right? So how does it feel to be partially responsible for all those deaths? Naw. I'm not nearly as desperate as you truthtards. I don't need to pretend you're part of Al Qaeda. You're pieces of shit all on your own!

One more question for you...Why in no examples of other building infernos, do we see any outward ejecting of parts of the building, nor do we hear any popping sounds as they came down? Oh that's right I forgot, they DIDN'T come down or explode like the WTC towers...my bad.

Yes, because ALL you geniuses know EVERY BUILDING has to react the EXACT SAME WAY regardless of what they are built of, how they are built or what happened! You geniuses may even get to double digit IQs some day! Well, maybe not.

 

[Patriot911]

Tell me something Mr. Jones.

You sit here bring up the fact that no building has ever globally collapsed do to fire and provide examples. You want to know WHY the steel performed differently in those buildings than in WTC7.

SO I am asking you yet again. Why did the steel perform differently in the buildings that showed NO signs of collapse as compared to the buildings that partially collapsed.

What is the difference?

where was the design of wtc 7 called into fault and what new building codes have been enacted as a result of the wtc 7 collapse ?

The design wasn't at fault. The building wasn't designed to withstand being on fire for more than four hours (that's how long fire retardant will keep heat away from the steel in most buildings) and it wasn't designed to have fires go unfought. Now, you could be a retard like you guys and force everyone to design buildings to withstand every possible scenario, but it is really hard to build bank vaults that big.

 

[Gamolon]

Tell me something Mr. Jones.

You sit here bring up the fact that no building has ever globally collapsed do to fire and provide examples. You want to know WHY the steel performed differently in those buildings than in WTC7.

SO I am asking you yet again. Why did the steel perform differently in the buildings that showed NO signs of collapse as compared to the buildings that partially collapsed.

What is the difference?

where was the design of wtc 7 called into fault and what new building codes have been enacted as a result of the wtc 7 collapse ?

It wasn't a DESIGN FLAW dumbass. It's not like someone fucked up and designed it incorrectly. The fact that you don't get this is proven by your idiotic statement that engineers designed structures to compensate thermal expansion due to office fires.

Here is a quute from the following site.
NIST WTC 7 Investigation Finds Building Fires Caused Collapse, 08/21/08

According to the report, a key factor leading to the eventual collapse of WTC 7 was thermal expansion of long-span floor systems at temperatures “hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in current practice for fire resistance ratings." WTC 7 used a structural system design in widespread use.

According to the report, a key factor leading to the eventual collapse of WTC 7 was thermal expansion of long-span floor systems at temperatures “hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in current practice for fire resistance ratings." WTC 7 used a structural system design in widespread use.

Since thermal expansion due to office fires wasn't designed for, this is what happened. This is why they made the suggested code changes.


Now I ask you. Which of the buildings you guys bring up that had office fires had long span structural components like WTC7? Apples to apples right eots?

 

[Mr. Jones]

Tell me something Mr. Jones.

You sit here bring up the fact that no building has ever globally collapsed do to fire and provide examples. You want to know WHY the steel performed differently in those buildings than in WTC7.

SO I am asking you yet again. Why did the steel perform differently in the buildings that showed NO signs of collapse as compared to the buildings that partially collapsed.

What is the difference?

where was the design of wtc 7 called into fault and what new building codes have been enacted as a result of the wtc 7 collapse ?

It wasn't a DESIGN FLAW dumbass. It's not like someone fucked up and designed it incorrectly. The fact that you don't get this is proven by your idiotic statement that engineers designed structures to compensate thermal expansion due to office fires.

Here is a quute from the following site.
NIST WTC 7 Investigation Finds Building Fires Caused Collapse, 08/21/08

According to the report, a key factor leading to the eventual collapse of WTC 7 was thermal expansion of long-span floor systems at temperatures “hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in current practice for fire resistance ratings." WTC 7 used a structural system design in widespread use.

According to the report, a key factor leading to the eventual collapse of WTC 7 was thermal expansion of long-span floor systems at temperatures “hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in current practice for fire resistance ratings." WTC 7 used a structural system design in widespread use.

Since thermal expansion due to office fires wasn't designed for, this is what happened. This is why they made the suggested code changes.


Now I ask you. Which of the buildings you guys bring up that had office fires had long span structural components like WTC7? Apples to apples right eots?

So you reply with another question?
This is something 60ft. or longer, and it is still made of steel. In fact the longer the piece the better it will dissipate heat. As you know the thermal expansion of steel beams and columns is quite minimal, and hardly a cause for concern in 100 yrs of construction, now you say that because the 7 building had components 60ft or longer and therefore it was susceptible to thermal expansion, that caused it to come down, at free fall speeds is far fetched to say the least, and quite a reach in explaining this collapse.
Again it is a steel component, steel moves heat away, the longer or more massive the part the better it does this. Your explanation is a fail again.
Buildings made of steel do not, nor ever have collapsed at free fall speed due to fire, not to mention sporadic and displaced fires.

It is amazing how readily you except the NIST theory, with all the holes in it, and first time in history thermal expansion, when they did not have much if any of the WTC 7 steel to confirm their theory. They are just guessing, and guessing that their version wont be questioned, but they guessed wrong.
Why is it that they wont reveal their modeling equations or program for others to study?
Pretty suspicious to say the least. NIST was used as another arm of the 9-11 cover up that's why. Be a real American and question 9-11 instead of helping in the cover up, don't you care about your nation?

 

[Mr. Jones]

Thanks to a newly discovered law of physics by the National Institute of Standards and Technology or NIST it is now possible for all of us to become a controlled demolition expert. All you need is a couple of gallons of gasoline, start a couple of office fires and wait for the building to collapse neatly into its own footprint. I think I will apply for a permit on Monday and start my new business imploding buildings because I love to see buildings implode and I hear you can ask big bucks to do it.

This amazing phenomenon is the “fourth law of movement” or the “NIST law of movement“. According to the scientists at NIST a key factor leading to the eventual collapse of WTC 7 was thermal expansion of long-span floor systems at temperatures “hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in current practice for fire resistance ratings. In other words; the LONG-span floor systems heated up due to low temperature office fires and magically expanded and broke all the welded connections around a column, the column unsupported started to buckle and bingo, cascading floor collapses ensued bring the building down into its own footprint ....

Let’s start at the beginning: What was WTC 7 and perhaps more important what was housed in WTC 7?

WTC 7 was a huge 47 floor Sky scraper higher than the Sky tower in Auckland. It was house to amongst others a CIA head quarter and Giuliani’s safety bunker. The building had been strengthened to the point that it could withstand a nuclear blast and it was build like a building within a building, this is what Larry Silverstein had to say about it:

”We built in enough redundancy to allow entire portions of floors to be removed without affecting the building’s structural integrity, on the assumption that someone might need double-height floors,” said Larry Silverstein, president of the company.

Yet NIST would have us believe that due to a unique construction the building could pulverise in mid air within 7 sec. due to low heat office fires that burn around 20 minutes in any given environment until the office contents have burned up after which it goes on to burn somewhere else.

* The NIST has not been able to investigate steel from the building because the crime scene was destroyed and all the steel was shipped off to China to be recycled.
This is very serious; how can you find out what really happened to a building if none of the building remains to be examined. Ho can you find out what caused this incredibly anomalous collapse if there is no way to determine if explosives have been used for example?

But then the NIST tells us that computer modelling and testing was enough to be able to draw their conclusions. That is all fine but then show us the computer models used and show us why their conclusions are scientific and conclusive yet they offer only an unscientific video animation.
* NIST’s rapport states that they did not consider a controlled demolition realistic and therefore did not investigate this possibility because there were no explosions loud enough to support that hypotheses.
* For starters there are numerous videoed witness testimonies about explosion, about foreknowledge and even two witness testimonies confirming a huge explosion in the lobby before the second plane hit the building totally destroying the lobby. Without the building collapsing I might add until 8 hours later. What’s more in an Italian documentary two policemen who are talking to the mother of one of them get just about blown of their feet by explosions as the building commences to collapse. When they want to go to the building the get stopped by some fire fighters and when they say, “the building is coming down,” the fire fighters clearly know already, in fact they are saying so.


I know this is from someones blog and all, but it just about hits the nail on the head, that NIST and its backers would have us believe non sense, and their computer modeling can't be validated by any one else.

The collapse of WTC 7 and the new law of physics as discovered by NIST. « Aotearoa: a wider perspective

 

[Patriot911]

* The NIST has not been able to investigate steel from the building because the crime scene was destroyed and all the steel was shipped off to China to be recycled.
This is very serious; how can you find out what really happened to a building if none of the building remains to be examined. Ho can you find out what caused this incredibly anomalous collapse if there is no way to determine if explosives have been used for example?

Ah. I love it! I specifically showed Mr. Jones YESTERDAY that all the steel wasn't shipped off, yet here he is parroting that all the steel was shipped off and there was none to test.

Anyone else need any evidence Mr. Jones is a blatant pathological liar and bullshit artist?

 

[SFC Ollie]

* The NIST has not been able to investigate steel from the building because the crime scene was destroyed and all the steel was shipped off to China to be recycled.
This is very serious; how can you find out what really happened to a building if none of the building remains to be examined. Ho can you find out what caused this incredibly anomalous collapse if there is no way to determine if explosives have been used for example?

Ah. I love it! I specifically showed Mr. Jones YESTERDAY that all the steel wasn't shipped off, yet here he is parroting that all the steel was shipped off and there was none to test.

Anyone else need any evidence Mr. Jones is a blatant pathological liar and bullshit artist?

I just wonder why they keep insisting that 7WTC fell in only 7 seconds when we all know there was seven seconds between the beginning of the collapse and the first movement of the facade. I would say they are rather dishonest with themselves.