why is eot's dodging this simple question

[daws101]

show me an actual experiment not using wtc7 as proof.. to show that "the laws of physics" can be broken under controlled and monitored conditions that can be repeated.
also you must name what laws were broken.

 

[Godboy]

If the laws of physics were broken, I'm pretty sure we would have heard about it from the scientific community by now.

 

[percysunshine]

Hate to rain on the parade, but physics has no 'laws'. It has empirical data, hypothesis, theories, and nerdy people with glasses that could use a bit of social skill training.

Everything else you hear about physics is an advertising ploy.

 

[Godboy]

Hate to rain on the parade, but physics has no 'laws'. It has empirical data, hypothesis, theories, and nerdy people with glasses that could use a bit of social skill training.

Everything else you hear about physics is an advertising ploy.

They are laws until proven otherwise.

 

[Mad Scientist]

I'm positive Oswald was the lone shooter because the Warren SELF EDITED said so.

Our Gov't would never lie to us.

*I think I may have a Computer Virus.

 

[percysunshine]

Hate to rain on the parade, but physics has no 'laws'. It has empirical data, hypothesis, theories, and nerdy people with glasses that could use a bit of social skill training.

Everything else you hear about physics is an advertising ploy.

They are laws until proven otherwise.

Moron legislatures write laws.

 

[Godboy]

Hate to rain on the parade, but physics has no 'laws'. It has empirical data, hypothesis, theories, and nerdy people with glasses that could use a bit of social skill training.

Everything else you hear about physics is an advertising ploy.

They are laws until proven otherwise.

Moron legislatures write laws.

You arent aware of "the laws of physics" and IM the moron?

 

[daws101]

I'm positive Oswald was the lone shooter because the Warren SELF EDITED said so.

Our Gov't would never lie to us.

*I think I may have a Computer Virus.

another dodge !
it's a simple request "can any of you twoofers provide non 911/wtc7 evidence of the bending, breaking etc...of the laws of physics..?


the self editing and never bullshit is not relevant to the question!

 

[Mr. Jones]

I'm positive Oswald was the lone shooter because the Warren SELF EDITED said so.

Our Gov't would never lie to us.

*I think I may have a Computer Virus.

another dodge !
it's a simple request "can any of you twoofers provide non 911/wtc7 evidence of the bending, breaking etc...of the laws of physics..?


the self editing and never bullshit is not relevant to the question!

CONTROLLED DEMOLITION allows buildings to fall at free fall speeds because it removes resistance structure, thereby circumventing the laws of physics. Don't know if that is what you mean....

 

[daws101]

I'm positive Oswald was the lone shooter because the Warren SELF EDITED said so.

Our Gov't would never lie to us.

*I think I may have a Computer Virus.

another dodge !
it's a simple request "can any of you twoofers provide non 911/wtc7 evidence of the bending, breaking etc...of the laws of physics..?


the self editing and never bullshit is not relevant to the question!

CONTROLLED DEMOLITION allows buildings to fall at free fall speeds because it removes resistance structure, thereby circumventing the laws of physics. Don't know if that is what you mean....

it's not and your wrong ...so gravity's not physics?

 

[Mr. Jones]

another dodge !
it's a simple request "can any of you twoofers provide non 911/wtc7 evidence of the bending, breaking etc...of the laws of physics..?


the self editing and never bullshit is not relevant to the question!

CONTROLLED DEMOLITION allows buildings to fall at free fall speeds because it removes resistance structure, thereby circumventing the laws of physics. Don't know if that is what you mean....

it's not and your wrong ...so gravity's not physics?

CD removes the laws of conservation of momentum, aka THE RESISTANCE A FALLING STRUCTURE WERE TO ENCOUNTER IN A NATURAL GRAVITY ONLY DRIVEN COLLAPSE.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Sometimes people don't wanna' believe that their Gov't would screw them over and lie to them. Sorta' like "Battered Wife" syndrome.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

If the laws of physics were broken, I'm pretty sure we would have heard about it from the scientific community by now.

you have,its just trolls like you and Dawgshit here in denial cover your ears and close your eyes living in denial and only see and hear what you want to see and hear.

 

[daws101]

CONTROLLED DEMOLITION allows buildings to fall at free fall speeds because it removes resistance structure, thereby circumventing the laws of physics. Don't know if that is what you mean....

it's not and your wrong ...so gravity's not physics?

CD removes the laws of conservation of momentum, aka THE RESISTANCE A FALLING STRUCTURE WERE TO ENCOUNTER IN A NATURAL GRAVITY ONLY DRIVEN COLLAPSE.

BULLSHIT:12 WHAT ABOUT THE FREE-FALL COLLAPSE OF BUILDING 7? That is the silver bullet that proves controlled demolition! NIST studied the collapse of one face of the 47-story Building 7 and found that indeed, on that one face, it collapsed “at gravitational acceleration” for eight stories over 2.25 seconds. The rest of that collapse was at considerably less than free-fall. After the internal supports collapsed, the perimeter walls were pulled inward. Every time a column snapped like a stick, it shifted its load at the speed of sound to other columns, and the collapse “gradually” accelerated over about two seconds. In phase two, the building was indeed collapsing at free-fall acceleration.

Free-fall collapse speed does not mean no resistance, it means no net resistance. Those collapsing beams still clinging to the walls functioned as levers. So there were three forces at work on Building 7 during its collapse, and the sum of these three forces varied with time: the constant downward force of gravity, the variable upward force of residual structural resistance, and variable leveraged downward forces due to connections to other parts of the building. The leveraging forces may have briefly accelerated parts of Building 7 at greater than 1G, and in fact the NIST Report shows very slightly faster than free-fall for a second or so, though that could just be the margin of error.




Free-fall collapse speed does not mean no resistance, it means no net resistance!

TRANSLATION FOR YOU SLAP DICKS : "the laws of conservation of momentum WERE NOT IN ANY WAY effected by the wtc7 collapse,.

http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/11-09-07/



http://video.popularmechanics.com/services/player/bcpid1745093293?bctid=1745050112

 

[daws101]

no answers to the op ....just dodging !

 

[LA RAM FAN]

two farts in a row from you dawgshit.

 

[Mr. Jones]

it's not and your wrong ...so gravity's not physics?

CD removes the laws of conservation of momentum, aka THE RESISTANCE A FALLING STRUCTURE WERE TO ENCOUNTER IN A NATURAL GRAVITY ONLY DRIVEN COLLAPSE.

BULLSHIT:12 WHAT ABOUT THE FREE-FALL COLLAPSE OF BUILDING 7? That is the silver bullet that proves controlled demolition! NIST studied the collapse of one face of the 47-story Building 7 and found that indeed, on that one face, it collapsed “at gravitational acceleration” for eight stories over 2.25 seconds. The rest of that collapse was at considerably less than free-fall. After the internal supports collapsed, the perimeter walls were pulled inward. Every time a column snapped like a stick, it shifted its load at the speed of sound to other columns, and the collapse “gradually” accelerated over about two seconds. In phase two, the building was indeed collapsing at free-fall acceleration.

Free-fall collapse speed does not mean no resistance, it means no net resistance. Those collapsing beams still clinging to the walls functioned as levers. So there were three forces at work on Building 7 during its collapse, and the sum of these three forces varied with time: the constant downward force of gravity, the variable upward force of residual structural resistance, and variable leveraged downward forces due to connections to other parts of the building. The leveraging forces may have briefly accelerated parts of Building 7 at greater than 1G, and in fact the NIST Report shows very slightly faster than free-fall for a second or so, though that could just be the margin of error.




Free-fall collapse speed does not mean no resistance, it means no net resistance!

TRANSLATION FOR YOU SLAP DICKS : "the laws of conservation of momentum WERE NOT IN ANY WAY effected by the wtc7 collapse,.

Skeptic » eSkeptic » Wednesday, September 7th, 2011



LSDYNA Physics-based model of the collapse initiation of WTC 7

Show one video where the roofline DOES NOT descend evenly you fuckwad. What the fuck are you ignorant, blind and stupid too? My God, the thing came down, without being hit by a plane, had only sporadic fires in the heavily fortified building, NIST admitted to free fall after they fucking tried to conceal it, AFTER they explained in detail the impossibility of free fall because of the resistance of the buildings mass, and now you get some bullshit form some assholes who posted on a site that the building somehow came down in stages?? With no observable distortions being visable on the outside?? What fucking video are you and they watching?

Look, the building came down in a time that would only be conceivable if the resisting mass was removed, period. Gravity only collapses come down in staggered sequences, usually leaning to the weakest links of the structure, and no where near free fall times.

Free-fall collapse speed does not mean no resistance, it means no net resistance. Those collapsing beams still clinging to the walls functioned as levers.

Oh I see...sorta like when you dumbfucks were all saying the steel melted then changed it to only weakened....Hey dumbfuck...the walls were connected to the steel columns and beams, and didn't show any sign of distortion. So how can "those collapsing beams" be "still clinging to the walls" without the walls of the building IE: like the OUTSIDE WALLS, not showing any indication of this "collapsing"? You admit to the columns and beams being connected and "clinging" to the walls, yet you think its perfectly normal for these massive steel components to just be hiding and collapsing inside while attached to the walls and the facade, and the walls and facade keeping it all a big secret??? You have no fucking brain. It is astonishing how the fuck you function as a member of the human race with an empty cavern where a brain should be.

and the sum of these three forces varied with time:

Time? Really? How did all of these 3 forces have the time to do their works if the first 100 stories fell at free fall speed? This is the point of the problem...there has to be time for these forces to overcome the MASSIVE resistance from ALLL those beams and columns.

Every time a column snapped like a stick,

BULLSHIT! They weren't sticks asshole! Nor were they spaghetti, or linguini or your favorite pasta either, you ignorant fucking stooge! They were STEEL, and if you had any sense you would learn about the properties of STEEL, and what it takes to overcome its strength, instead of posting some bullshit that avoids the facts about it altogether.

But on 9/11 the stronger core columns came down last,

Even the NIST computer simulation for WTC 7 shows how the columns gave way allowing the building to fall! Holy shit you really picked some BS site that really fucks things up assbackward didn't you?

“Considering the high temperatures reached during the destruction of the WTC … Iron-rich spheres … would be expected to be present in the Dust.”

No proof of any of the constant temps, at all the support points, at the precise times, for the required length of times to produce the WTC fall! What was there, that produced these high temps? You know, the ones that were melting in the rubble piles for 3 months? See...you can't have it both ways fuckwad. You can't say there were no massive temps in the rubble piles, and that it is all a lie, then try to use the "high temperatures" to explain the "destruction" of the WTC. So what caused the high temps? And how did these "high temperatures" manage NOT to dissipate as steel normally does to heat? How did the "high temps" remain concentrated on the support points to cause the rapid falling times of all the buildings?

That’s not the side where tons of flaming debris from the towers smashed into the south face, creating huge gashes and fires on multiple floors.

Seriously "Tons of flaming debris"? "Smash into the south face"?? 'Creating HUGE gashes"? Where?? And why did NIST say these over exaggerating details were of no significance in the demise of WTC 7?

You couldn't have picked a more disingenuous write up of BS exaggerating talking points with no scientific backing to reply to your own BS thread.
Seems like you tried to call out Eots and instead you make a damn fool out of yourself yet again. Nice job Dawgshit. Totally stupid but you never fail to entertain..Oh shit I needed a good laugh thanks...

 

[daws101]

CD removes the laws of conservation of momentum, aka THE RESISTANCE A FALLING STRUCTURE WERE TO ENCOUNTER IN A NATURAL GRAVITY ONLY DRIVEN COLLAPSE.

BULLSHIT:12 WHAT ABOUT THE FREE-FALL COLLAPSE OF BUILDING 7? That is the silver bullet that proves controlled demolition! NIST studied the collapse of one face of the 47-story Building 7 and found that indeed, on that one face, it collapsed “at gravitational acceleration” for eight stories over 2.25 seconds. The rest of that collapse was at considerably less than free-fall. After the internal supports collapsed, the perimeter walls were pulled inward. Every time a column snapped like a stick, it shifted its load at the speed of sound to other columns, and the collapse “gradually” accelerated over about two seconds. In phase two, the building was indeed collapsing at free-fall acceleration.

Free-fall collapse speed does not mean no resistance, it means no net resistance. Those collapsing beams still clinging to the walls functioned as levers. So there were three forces at work on Building 7 during its collapse, and the sum of these three forces varied with time: the constant downward force of gravity, the variable upward force of residual structural resistance, and variable leveraged downward forces due to connections to other parts of the building. The leveraging forces may have briefly accelerated parts of Building 7 at greater than 1G, and in fact the NIST Report shows very slightly faster than free-fall for a second or so, though that could just be the margin of error.




Free-fall collapse speed does not mean no resistance, it means no net resistance!

TRANSLATION FOR YOU SLAP DICKS : "the laws of conservation of momentum WERE NOT IN ANY WAY effected by the wtc7 collapse,.

Skeptic » eSkeptic » Wednesday, September 7th, 2011



LSDYNA Physics-based model of the collapse initiation of WTC 7

Show one video where the roofline DOES NOT descend evenly you fuckwad. What the fuck are you ignorant, blind and stupid too? My God, the thing came down, without being hit by a plane, had only sporadic fires in the heavily fortified building, NIST admitted to free fall after they fucking tried to conceal it, AFTER they explained in detail the impossibility of free fall because of the resistance of the buildings mass, and now you get some bullshit form some assholes who posted on a site that the building somehow came down in stages?? With no observable distortions being visable on the outside?? What fucking video are you and they watching?

Look, the building came down in a time that would only be conceivable if the resisting mass was removed, period. Gravity only collapses come down in staggered sequences, usually leaning to the weakest links of the structure, and no where near free fall times.


Oh I see...sorta like when you dumbfucks were all saying the steel melted then changed it to only weakened....Hey dumbfuck...the walls were connected to the steel columns and beams, and didn't show any sign of distortion. So how can "those collapsing beams" be "still clinging to the walls" without the walls of the building IE: like the OUTSIDE WALLS, not showing any indication of this "collapsing"? You admit to the columns and beams being connected and "clinging" to the walls, yet you think its perfectly normal for these massive steel components to just be hiding and collapsing inside while attached to the walls and the facade, and the walls and facade keeping it all a big secret??? You have no fucking brain. It is astonishing how the fuck you function as a member of the human race with an empty cavern where a brain should be.

Time? Really? How did all of these 3 forces have the time to do their works if the first 100 stories fell at free fall speed? This is the point of the problem...there has to be time for these forces to overcome the MASSIVE resistance from ALLL those beams and columns.

BULLSHIT! They weren't sticks asshole! Nor were they spaghetti, or linguini or your favorite pasta either, you ignorant fucking stooge! They were STEEL, and if you had any sense you would learn about the properties of STEEL, and what it takes to overcome its strength, instead of posting some bullshit that avoids the facts about it altogether.



Even the NIST computer simulation for WTC 7 shows how the columns gave way allowing the building to fall! Holy shit you really picked some BS site that really fucks things up assbackward didn't you?

“Considering the high temperatures reached during the destruction of the WTC … Iron-rich spheres … would be expected to be present in the Dust.”

No proof of any of the constant temps, at all the support points, at the precise times, for the required length of times to produce the WTC fall! What was there, that produced these high temps? You know, the ones that were melting in the rubble piles for 3 months? See...you can't have it both ways fuckwad. You can't say there were no massive temps in the rubble piles, and that it is all a lie, then try to use the "high temperatures" to explain the "destruction" of the WTC. So what caused the high temps? And how did these "high temperatures" manage NOT to dissipate as steel normally does to heat? How did the "high temps" remain concentrated on the support points to cause the rapid falling times of all the buildings?

That’s not the side where tons of flaming debris from the towers smashed into the south face, creating huge gashes and fires on multiple floors.

Seriously "Tons of flaming debris"? "Smash into the south face"?? 'Creating HUGE gashes"? Where?? And why did NIST say these over exaggerating details were of no significance in the demise of WTC 7?

You couldn't have picked a more disingenuous write up of BS exaggerating talking points with no scientific backing to reply to your own BS thread.
Seems like you tried to call out Eots and instead you make a damn fool out of yourself yet again. Nice job Dawgshit. Totally stupid but you never fail to entertain..Oh shit I needed a good laugh thanks...

still no answer to the op.

but lots of rationalizing !


damn funny !


10. Some people have said that a failure at one column should not have produced a symmetrical fall like this one. What is NIST’s answer to those assertions?

WTC 7's collapse, viewed from the exterior (most videos were taken from the north), did appear to fall almost uniformly as a single unit. This occurred because the interior failures that took place did not cause the exterior framing to fail until the final stages of the building collapse. The interior floor framing and columns collapsed downward and pulled away from the exterior frame. There were clues that internal damage was taking place prior to the downward movement of the exterior frame, such as when the east penthouse fell downward into the building and windows broke out on the north face at the ends of the building core. The symmetric appearance of the downward fall of WTC 7 was primarily due to the greater stiffness and strength of its exterior frame relative to the interior framing.

http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/faqs_wtc7.cfm

"did appear to fall almost uniformly as a single unit." : appear seem to have an outward aspect : to appear to the observation or understanding
not did fall as one unit.

 

[Mr. Jones]

BULLSHIT:12 WHAT ABOUT THE FREE-FALL COLLAPSE OF BUILDING 7? That is the silver bullet that proves controlled demolition! NIST studied the collapse of one face of the 47-story Building 7 and found that indeed, on that one face, it collapsed “at gravitational acceleration” for eight stories over 2.25 seconds. The rest of that collapse was at considerably less than free-fall. After the internal supports collapsed, the perimeter walls were pulled inward. Every time a column snapped like a stick, it shifted its load at the speed of sound to other columns, and the collapse “gradually” accelerated over about two seconds. In phase two, the building was indeed collapsing at free-fall acceleration.

Free-fall collapse speed does not mean no resistance, it means no net resistance. Those collapsing beams still clinging to the walls functioned as levers. So there were three forces at work on Building 7 during its collapse, and the sum of these three forces varied with time: the constant downward force of gravity, the variable upward force of residual structural resistance, and variable leveraged downward forces due to connections to other parts of the building. The leveraging forces may have briefly accelerated parts of Building 7 at greater than 1G, and in fact the NIST Report shows very slightly faster than free-fall for a second or so, though that could just be the margin of error.




Free-fall collapse speed does not mean no resistance, it means no net resistance!

TRANSLATION FOR YOU SLAP DICKS : "the laws of conservation of momentum WERE NOT IN ANY WAY effected by the wtc7 collapse,.

Skeptic » eSkeptic » Wednesday, September 7th, 2011



LSDYNA Physics-based model of the collapse initiation of WTC 7

Show one video where the roofline DOES NOT descend evenly you fuckwad. What the fuck are you ignorant, blind and stupid too? My God, the thing came down, without being hit by a plane, had only sporadic fires in the heavily fortified building, NIST admitted to free fall after they fucking tried to conceal it, AFTER they explained in detail the impossibility of free fall because of the resistance of the buildings mass, and now you get some bullshit form some assholes who posted on a site that the building somehow came down in stages?? With no observable distortions being visable on the outside?? What fucking video are you and they watching?

Look, the building came down in a time that would only be conceivable if the resisting mass was removed, period. Gravity only collapses come down in staggered sequences, usually leaning to the weakest links of the structure, and no where near free fall times.


Oh I see...sorta like when you dumbfucks were all saying the steel melted then changed it to only weakened....Hey dumbfuck...the walls were connected to the steel columns and beams, and didn't show any sign of distortion. So how can "those collapsing beams" be "still clinging to the walls" without the walls of the building IE: like the OUTSIDE WALLS, not showing any indication of this "collapsing"? You admit to the columns and beams being connected and "clinging" to the walls, yet you think its perfectly normal for these massive steel components to just be hiding and collapsing inside while attached to the walls and the facade, and the walls and facade keeping it all a big secret??? You have no fucking brain. It is astonishing how the fuck you function as a member of the human race with an empty cavern where a brain should be.

Time? Really? How did all of these 3 forces have the time to do their works if the first 100 stories fell at free fall speed? This is the point of the problem...there has to be time for these forces to overcome the MASSIVE resistance from ALLL those beams and columns.

BULLSHIT! They weren't sticks asshole! Nor were they spaghetti, or linguini or your favorite pasta either, you ignorant fucking stooge! They were STEEL, and if you had any sense you would learn about the properties of STEEL, and what it takes to overcome its strength, instead of posting some bullshit that avoids the facts about it altogether.



Even the NIST computer simulation for WTC 7 shows how the columns gave way allowing the building to fall! Holy shit you really picked some BS site that really fucks things up assbackward didn't you?

No proof of any of the constant temps, at all the support points, at the precise times, for the required length of times to produce the WTC fall! What was there, that produced these high temps? You know, the ones that were melting in the rubble piles for 3 months? See...you can't have it both ways fuckwad. You can't say there were no massive temps in the rubble piles, and that it is all a lie, then try to use the "high temperatures" to explain the "destruction" of the WTC. So what caused the high temps? And how did these "high temperatures" manage NOT to dissipate as steel normally does to heat? How did the "high temps" remain concentrated on the support points to cause the rapid falling times of all the buildings?

That’s not the side where tons of flaming debris from the towers smashed into the south face, creating huge gashes and fires on multiple floors.

Seriously "Tons of flaming debris"? "Smash into the south face"?? 'Creating HUGE gashes"? Where?? And why did NIST say these over exaggerating details were of no significance in the demise of WTC 7?

You couldn't have picked a more disingenuous write up of BS exaggerating talking points with no scientific backing to reply to your own BS thread.
Seems like you tried to call out Eots and instead you make a damn fool out of yourself yet again. Nice job Dawgshit. Totally stupid but you never fail to entertain..Oh shit I needed a good laugh thanks...

still no answer to the op.

but lots of rationalizing !


damn funny !


10. Some people have said that a failure at one column should not have produced a symmetrical fall like this one. What is NIST’s answer to those assertions?

WTC 7's collapse, viewed from the exterior (most videos were taken from the north), did appear to fall almost uniformly as a single unit. This occurred because the interior failures that took place did not cause the exterior framing to fail until the final stages of the building collapse. The interior floor framing and columns collapsed downward and pulled away from the exterior frame. There were clues that internal damage was taking place prior to the downward movement of the exterior frame, such as when the east penthouse fell downward into the building and windows broke out on the north face at the ends of the building core. The symmetric appearance of the downward fall of WTC 7 was primarily due to the greater stiffness and strength of its exterior frame relative to the interior framing.

FAQs - NIST WTC 7 Investigation

"did appear to fall almost uniformly as a single unit." : appear seem to have an outward aspect : to appear to the observation or understanding
not did fall as one unit.

This better explains a CD then destruction by sporadic fires on certain floors. It does not provide a satisfactory explanation of a building that fell with many characteristics of a CD,
but is being blamed on sporadic fires. It obvious you never worked with intense heat or steel and understand how steel dissipates heat and spreads it to connecting steel parts, thus cooling the affected part in the first place. Only high, intense heat at precise points in the supporting structure could cause it to fall like a CD. All you are doing is describing what a CD to the support beams and columns did, while leaving out facts about the steel, and the time a fire would take to over come its strength.
Larry discussing a CD with his insurance company is a tell tale sign..Perhaps the CD industry could eliminate using all the fancy devices that are needed and currently employed and use a few fires...think of the overhead savings..

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Show one video where the roofline DOES NOT descend evenly you fuckwad. What the fuck are you ignorant, blind and stupid too? My God, the thing came down, without being hit by a plane, had only sporadic fires in the heavily fortified building, NIST admitted to free fall after they fucking tried to conceal it, AFTER they explained in detail the impossibility of free fall because of the resistance of the buildings mass, and now you get some bullshit form some assholes who posted on a site that the building somehow came down in stages?? With no observable distortions being visable on the outside?? What fucking video are you and they watching?

Look, the building came down in a time that would only be conceivable if the resisting mass was removed, period. Gravity only collapses come down in staggered sequences, usually leaning to the weakest links of the structure, and no where near free fall times.


Oh I see...sorta like when you dumbfucks were all saying the steel melted then changed it to only weakened....Hey dumbfuck...the walls were connected to the steel columns and beams, and didn't show any sign of distortion. So how can "those collapsing beams" be "still clinging to the walls" without the walls of the building IE: like the OUTSIDE WALLS, not showing any indication of this "collapsing"? You admit to the columns and beams being connected and "clinging" to the walls, yet you think its perfectly normal for these massive steel components to just be hiding and collapsing inside while attached to the walls and the facade, and the walls and facade keeping it all a big secret??? You have no fucking brain. It is astonishing how the fuck you function as a member of the human race with an empty cavern where a brain should be.

Time? Really? How did all of these 3 forces have the time to do their works if the first 100 stories fell at free fall speed? This is the point of the problem...there has to be time for these forces to overcome the MASSIVE resistance from ALLL those beams and columns.

BULLSHIT! They weren't sticks asshole! Nor were they spaghetti, or linguini or your favorite pasta either, you ignorant fucking stooge! They were STEEL, and if you had any sense you would learn about the properties of STEEL, and what it takes to overcome its strength, instead of posting some bullshit that avoids the facts about it altogether.



Even the NIST computer simulation for WTC 7 shows how the columns gave way allowing the building to fall! Holy shit you really picked some BS site that really fucks things up assbackward didn't you?

No proof of any of the constant temps, at all the support points, at the precise times, for the required length of times to produce the WTC fall! What was there, that produced these high temps? You know, the ones that were melting in the rubble piles for 3 months? See...you can't have it both ways fuckwad. You can't say there were no massive temps in the rubble piles, and that it is all a lie, then try to use the "high temperatures" to explain the "destruction" of the WTC. So what caused the high temps? And how did these "high temperatures" manage NOT to dissipate as steel normally does to heat? How did the "high temps" remain concentrated on the support points to cause the rapid falling times of all the buildings?



Seriously "Tons of flaming debris"? "Smash into the south face"?? 'Creating HUGE gashes"? Where?? And why did NIST say these over exaggerating details were of no significance in the demise of WTC 7?

You couldn't have picked a more disingenuous write up of BS exaggerating talking points with no scientific backing to reply to your own BS thread.
Seems like you tried to call out Eots and instead you make a damn fool out of yourself yet again. Nice job Dawgshit. Totally stupid but you never fail to entertain..Oh shit I needed a good laugh thanks...

still no answer to the op.

but lots of rationalizing !


damn funny !


10. Some people have said that a failure at one column should not have produced a symmetrical fall like this one. What is NIST’s answer to those assertions?

WTC 7's collapse, viewed from the exterior (most videos were taken from the north), did appear to fall almost uniformly as a single unit. This occurred because the interior failures that took place did not cause the exterior framing to fail until the final stages of the building collapse. The interior floor framing and columns collapsed downward and pulled away from the exterior frame. There were clues that internal damage was taking place prior to the downward movement of the exterior frame, such as when the east penthouse fell downward into the building and windows broke out on the north face at the ends of the building core. The symmetric appearance of the downward fall of WTC 7 was primarily due to the greater stiffness and strength of its exterior frame relative to the interior framing.

FAQs - NIST WTC 7 Investigation

"did appear to fall almost uniformly as a single unit." : appear seem to have an outward aspect : to appear to the observation or understanding
not did fall as one unit.

This better explains a CD then destruction by sporadic fires on certain floors. It does not provide a satisfactory explanation of a building that fell with many characteristics of a CD,
but is being blamed on sporadic fires. It obvious you never worked with intense heat or steel and understand how steel dissipates heat and spreads it to connecting steel parts, thus cooling the affected part in the first place. Only high, intense heat at precise points in the supporting structure could cause it to fall like a CD. All you are doing is describing what a CD to the support beams and columns did, while leaving out facts about the steel, and the time a fire would take to over come its strength.
Larry discussing a CD with his insurance company is a tell tale sign..Perhaps the CD industry could eliminate using all the fancy devices that are needed and currently employed and use a few fires...think of the overhead savings..

Dawgshits handlers sure are paying him well to keep coming back constantly to get his ass handed to him on a platter over and over and over again. Dawgshit reminds me of that other agent troll I CANT SEE THE LIGHT who kept coming back making a fool out of himself on a thread of mine after I mentioned how buildings dont fall straight down at free fall speed due to fire.As you know and remember Im sure, he tried to prove me wrong by showing a building falling down strait due to fire but all he did was help prove my case as you know because only part of the building fell.

The majority of it remained standing unlike bld 7 and the towers.You told that agent like it was how he was a miserable failure.That agent couldnt stand getting his ass handed to him on a platter and left.His handlers obviously did not pay him enough money to come back for constant ass beatings like Dawgshits handlers do.Dawgshits handlers obviously pay him really well in the fact he keeps coming back for more punishment day after day week after week humiliating himself.

yeah that was a great laugh he gave how he tried to call out Eots yet all he did in the process was show off what a dumb fucking moron he is who doesnt know ANYTHING at all about the properties of steel.That sure was a great laugh he gave us all.