911 WTC 7 Silent Thermate Demolition, Debunkers Grab Your Ankles!

[jillian]

no one is babbling but the troofer idiots.

of course, troofer idiots are deranged and don't understand that.

now run along.

how about you run along *****..you have nothing relevant offer you could not debate this subject if your life depended on it

How about you run along, *****.
You, like the rest of the foil-hat brigade, have never offered anything of value on this subject.

why don't you tell us again how NIST determined the collapse wtc 7 was from structural damage...lol

How 'bout you put the magnifying glass and tweezers down and leave your pecker alone, Princess.

You clearly have lost the debate...again

there is no "debate" with the tinfoil hat types.

 

[eots]

how about you run along *****..you have nothing relevant offer you could not debate this subject if your life depended on it

How about you run along, *****.
You, like the rest of the foil-hat brigade, have never offered anything of value on this subject.

why don't you tell us again how NIST determined the collapse wtc 7 was from structural damage...lol

How 'bout you put the magnifying glass and tweezers down and leave your pecker alone, Princess.

You clearly have lost the debate...again

there is no "debate" with the tinfoil hat types.

more ad hominem a sure sign of someone who lost a debate
absolutely nothing in regards to the collapse of building 7 as is the case with every single post you have ever posted in regard to 9/11...

 

[daws101]

no one is babbling but the troofer idiots.

of course, troofer idiots are deranged and don't understand that.

now run along.

how about you run along *****..you have nothing relevant offer you could not debate this subject if your life depended on it

How about you run along, *****.
You, like the rest of the foil-hat brigade, have never offered anything of value on this subject.

why don't you tell us again how NIST determined the collapse wtc 7 was from structural damage...lol

ok
What is progressive collapse?
Progressive collapse is defined as the spread of local damage from a single initiating event, from structural element to element, eventually resulting in the collapse of an entire structure or a disproportionately large part of it. The failure of WTC 7 was an example of a fire-induced progressive collapse.

Progressive collapse did NOT occur in the WTC towers, for two reasons. First, the collapse of each tower was not triggered by a local damage or a single initiating event. Second, the structures were able to redistribute loads from the impact and fire-damaged structural components and subsystems to undamaged components and to keep the building standing until a sudden, global collapse occurred. Had a hat truss that connected the core columns to the exterior frame not been installed to support a TV antenna atop each WTC tower after the structure had been fully designed, it is likely that the core of the WTC towers would have collapsed sooner, triggering a global collapse. Such a collapse would have some features similar to that of a progressive collapse.

How did the collapse of WTC 7 differ from the collapses of WTC 1 and WTC 2?
WTC 7 was unlike the WTC towers in many respects. WTC 7 was a more typical tall building in the design of its structural system. It was not struck by an aircraft. The collapse of WTC 7 was caused by a single initiating event-the failure of a northeast building column brought on by fire-induced damage to the adjacent flooring system and connections-which stands in contrast to the WTC 1 and WTC 2 failures, which were brought on by multiple factors, including structural damage caused by the aircraft impact, extensive dislodgement of the sprayed fire-resistive materials or fireproofing in the impacted region, and a weakening of the steel structures created by the fires.

The fires in WTC 7 were quite different from the fires in the WTC towers. Since WTC 7 was not doused with thousands of gallons of jet fuel, large areas of any floor were not ignited simultaneously as they were in the WTC towers. Instead, separate fires in WTC 7 broke out on different floors, most notably on Floors 7 to 9 and 11 to 13. The WTC 7 fires were similar to building contents fires that have occurred in several tall buildings where the automatic sprinklers did not function or were not present.

Why did WTC 7 collapse, while no other known building in history has collapsed due to fires alone?
The collapse of WTC 7 is the first known instance of a tall building brought down primarily by uncontrolled fires. The fires in WTC 7 were similar to those that have occurred in several tall buildings where the automatic sprinklers did not function or were not present. These other buildings, including Philadelphia's One Meridian Plaza, a 38-story skyscraper that burned for 18 hours in 1991, did not collapse due to differences in the design of the structural system.

Factors contributing to WTC 7's collapse included: the thermal expansion of building elements such as floor beams and girders, which occurred at temperatures hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in current practice for fire-resistance ratings; significant magnification of thermal expansion effects due to the long-span floors in the building; connections between structural elements that were designed to resist the vertical forces of gravity, not the thermally induced horizontal or lateral loads; and an overall structural system not designed to prevent fire-induced progressive collapse.

KEY sentence: The collapse of WTC 7 is the first known instance of a tall building brought down primarily by uncontrolled fires." Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation

primarily
[ prīˈme(ə)rəlē ]
ADVERB
adverb: primarily

1. 
   for the most part; mainly:

NIST admits that their simulation does not match the actual collapse.

“The results of this scenario were consistent with observations except that the screening wall on the roof fell downward before the west penthouse.” NCSTAR 1-9 Vol.2 p. 612

In the NIST computer simulation, the interior columns under the screenwall and west penthouse collapse east to west in about three seconds. (These sections of the building are shown in the top-down diagram below.) However, the actual collapse progression of these columns in the video takes only about 1/2 second. While NIST acknowledged the "almost simultaneous" collapse of the screenwall and west penthouse in the 2004 Progress Report (Appendix L, p. 34 and 44), in their computer simulation, this collapse took nearly three seconds.

This is yet another example of the NIST simulation being completely inconsistent with the actual features of the destruction of this building.

same bullshit different year...
btw the clip is from a twoofer youtube collection .....zero credibility..

 

[daws101]

NIST has refused to release the computer model input data in response to FOIA requests, claiming that its release would “jeopardize public safety"

Gross Negligence DeNISTifying the Destruction of the WTC Skyscrapers

assholes and erroneous speculators for truth .is not credible either.

 

[daws101]

. NIST used computer models that they said have never been used in such an application before and are the state of the art. For this they should be commended for their skill. But the validation of these modeling results is in question. Others have computed aspects with different conclusions on the cause mechanism of the collapse. Moreover, it is common in fire investigation to compute a time-line and compare it to known events. NIST has not done that.
Page 2 of Article Former Chief of NIST s Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation OpEdNews

Patriots Question 9 11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9 11 Commission Report and webmaster for Medical Professionals for 9/11 Truth Medical Professionals for 9 11 Truth
another shit load of zero credibility..

 

[Capstone]

Regarding means and covert access to the WTC buildings' internal support systems...



For those who aren't aware of Kevin Ryan and the manner in which he became involved in the 9/11 truth movement, he worked for a company that was contracted by the NIST group to conduct heat-testing on structural steel. In the course of his work on the project he became aware that NIST was apparently out to manipulate the findings and to spin them in a dishonest manner in order to support their predetermined conclusions. Concerned primarily for his company's reputation, he took his concerns to his superiors and ended up unemployed shortly thereafter.

People in various industries related to building design, construction, and even demolition have given voice to their doubts about the official 9/11 narrative and have paid the price for doing so. Danny Jowenko, a foreign "expert" in the logistics of controlled demolitions, ran into a tree Michael Hastings style after stating and reaffirming his assessment of Building 7's "collapse". For others, character assassination has been the preferred MO. Tom Sullivan, a retired formerly licensed 'loader' for CDI (one of the largest demolition companies in the industry worldwide), has been mercilessly demonized by NEOCT apologists following his appearance in a AE911Truth documentary (summarized in the following clip)...



One of the few legitimate criticisms of his testimony involves an alleged 1984 patent for "self-consuming thermite cutter charges". It turned out that the 1984 patent was for a self-consuming thermite-coated igniter, and that thermite "cutter charges" weren't explicitly patented until 1999 (with the latter patent making no mention of a "self-consuming" aspect). Despite this innocent mistake, it's easy to see how such devices could have been fasioned from the combined technologies of those two patents.

It's also been pointed out that explosives "loaders" aren't "experts" in the planning and logistics of controlled demolitions; they're relatively low-level workers in the actual hands-on aspects of the demo projects. This criticism, however, fails to account for the fact that low-level worker types are routinely used and cited as "expert witnesses" in courts of law all over the country. If you want to know about the real-world obstacles in home delivery, ask a delivery man! The facts remain: Sullivan was in a position to be intimately acquainted with the necessary steps involved in bringing down a building in the manner observed on 9/11/01 (particularly in the case of Building 7), so given a wildly high number of precendents, his testimony as an 'expert' witness would stand up in a court of law.

Going back to access, on top of the questions surrounding the company responsible for security at the WTC complex, a major "elevator modernization" project for buildings 1 & 2 was documented by local media sources and in Elevator World magazine. Eyewitnesses confirmed that elevator access had been restricted to the point of guards standing watch over the doors. This enormous project would have provided the perfect cover for the demoltion teams to get their materials and equipment into the buildings on pallets without raising suspicion from anyone outside of the loop. This, combined with a handful of stragically placed security shills and the tactic of conducting the bulk of the work outside of normal business hours, could easily explain how "they" pulled-off rigging the buildings in advance of the "attacks".

 

[daws101]

Regarding means and covert access to the WTC buildings' internal support systems...



For those who aren't aware of Kevin Ryan and the manner in which he became involved in the 9/11 truth movement, he worked for a company that was contracted by the NIST group to conduct heat-testing on structural steel. In the course of his work on the project he became aware that NIST was apparently out to manipulate the findings and to spin them in a dishonest manner in order to support their predetermined conclusions. Concerned primarily for his company's reputation, he took his concerns to his superiors and ended up unemployed shortly thereafter.

People in various industries related to building design, construction, and even demolition have given voice to their doubts about the official 9/11 narrative and have paid the price for doing so. Danny Jowenko, a foreign "expert" in the logistics of controlled demolitions, ran into a tree Michael Hastings style after stating and reaffirming his assessment of Building 7's "collapse". For others, character assassination has been the preferred MO. Tom Sullivan, a retired formerly licensed 'loader' for CDI (one of the largest demolition companies in the industry worldwide), has been mercilessly demonized by NEOCT apologists following his appearance in a AE911Truth documentary (summarized in the following clip)...



One of the few legitimate criticisms of his testimony involves an alleged 1984 patent for "self-consuming thermite cutter charges". It turned out that the 1984 patent was for a self-consuming thermite-coated igniter, and that thermite "cutter charges" weren't explicitly patented until 1999 (with the latter patent making no mention of a "self-consuming" aspect). Despite this innocent mistake, it's easy to see how such devices could have been fasioned from the combined technologies of those two patents.

It's also been pointed out that explosives "loaders" aren't "experts" in the planning and logistics of controlled demolitions; they're relatively low-level workers in the actual hands-on aspects of the demo projects. This criticism, however, fails to account for the fact that low-level worker types are routinely used and cited as "expert witnesses" in courts of law all over the country. If you want to know about the real-world obstacles in home delivery, ask a delivery man! The facts remain: Sullivan was in a position to be intimately acquainted with the necessary steps involved in bringing down a building in the manner observed on 9/11/01 (particularly in the case of Building 7), so given a wildly high number of precendents, his testimony as an 'expert' witness would stand up in a court of law.

Going back to access, on top of the questions surrounding the company responsible for security at the WTC complex, a major "elevator modernization" project for buildings 1 & 2 was documented by local media sources and in Elevator World magazine. Eyewitnesses confirmed that elevator access had been restricted to the point of guards standing watch over the doors. This enormous project would have provided the perfect cover for the demoltion teams to get their materials and equipment into the buildings on pallets without raising suspicion from anyone outside of the loop. This, combined with a handful of stragically placed security shills and the tactic of conducting the bulk of the work outside of normal business hours, could easily explain how "they" pulled off rigging the buildings in advance of the "attacks".

the zero credibility factor in this thread has skyrocketed....

 

[Capstone]

the zero credibility factor in this thread has skyrocketed....

Yeah, funny how it corresponded to the sudden rise of baseless ad hominem.

 

[daws101]

the zero credibility factor in this thread has skyrocketed....

Yeah, funny how it corresponded to the sudden rise of baseless ad hominem.

false! none of you twoofers were forced to pull that nonsense out of your collective asses.

 

[Capstone]

the zero credibility factor in this thread has skyrocketed....

Yeah, funny how it corresponded to the sudden rise of baseless ad hominem.

false! none of you twoofers were forced to pull that nonsense out of your collective asses.

Unlike you debwunker types, who have little recourse or choices beyond adolescent name-calling and the ad hominem fallacy.

 

[daws101]

the zero credibility factor in this thread has skyrocketed....

Yeah, funny how it corresponded to the sudden rise of baseless ad hominem.

false! none of you twoofers were forced to pull that nonsense out of your collective asses.

Unlike you debwunker types, who have little recourse or choices beyond adolescent name-calling and the ad hominem fallacy.

false! wishful thinking.
to the ignorant and unstable your shit looks solid ..in reality it's the worst of facades.....

 

[Capstone]

...to the ignorant and unstable your shit looks solid ..in reality it's the worst of facades.....

Meanwhile, to anyone with two IQ points to rub together, your shit looks about as solid as diarrhea.

There's a reason my stuff "looks solid" to you, Daws (as the "ignorant and unstable" person you are), ...and that's because it is rock-solid.

Now, unless you have something specific to say about my arguments or the evidence I've cited, I'm through with responding to your primary school level nonsense.

 

[SFC Ollie]

I see that the truthers still leave out the east penthouse, nice to know they still have nothing..... I'll stop in again in 6 months or so.....

 

[deep_space]

why is it called "FREE FALL", because its freely falling, that is NO resistance at all under the falling mass. So do tell, how is it that ALL resistance was removed, and all at the same time in order for WTC7 to drop at free fall acceleration for 2.25 sec?

 

[SAYIT]

why is it called "FREE FALL", because its freely falling, that is NO resistance at all under the falling mass. So do tell, how is it that ALL resistance was removed, and all at the same time in order for WTC7 to drop at free fall acceleration for 2.25 sec?

Once more for the monumentally dense:
Your 9/11 CT requires a controlled demo, preparation for which would have required a small army of workers and weeks or months and necessitated the gutting of the buildings. I would add that the explosions necessary to destroy key structural supports would have been numerous and very loud and would have left clear evidence of CD explosions.
All of that is just one small facet of the planning, perpetration and cover-up of what would have been the largest, most complex conspiracy in the history of man and no one from within that massive alleged conspiracy has whispered a word in over 13 years. No one.
Stop beating that dead horse, Princess ... the "Truther" Movement is O-V-E-R.

 

[eots]

why is it called "FREE FALL", because its freely falling, that is NO resistance at all under the falling mass. So do tell, how is it that ALL resistance was removed, and all at the same time in order for WTC7 to drop at free fall acceleration for 2.25 sec?

Once more for the monumentally dense:
Your 9/11 CT requires a controlled demo, preparation for which would have required a small army of workers and weeks or months and necessitated the gutting of the buildings. I would add that the explosions necessary to destroy key structural supports would have been numerous and very loud and would have left clear evidence of CD explosions.
All of that is just one small facet of the planning, perpetration and cover-up of what would have been the largest, most complex conspiracy in the history of man and no one from within that massive alleged conspiracy has whispered a word in over 13 years. No one.
Stop beating that dead horse, Princess ... the "Truther" Movement is O-V-E-R.

you became a demolition expert when exactly..there are experts in both intelligence and demolition that do not have estimates much much lower than that..and it is a myth that secrets can not be kept

 

[deep_space]

No matter what bits of the event can be debated as to this or that is NOT just like a controlled demolition, the one feature that stands out is the fact that the building was totally demolished. When ever in history was a building totally demolished by actions that were NOT specifically engineered to cause total destruction?

 

[eots]

I see that the truthers still leave out the east penthouse, nice to know they still have nothing..... I'll stop in again in 6 months or so.....

ollie thinks this happened by the failure of a single column due to fire..lol..silly ollie

 

[eots]

No matter what bits of the event can be debated as to this or that is NOT just like a controlled demolition, the one feature that stands out is the fact that the building was totally demolished. When ever in history was a building totally demolished by actions that were NOT specifically engineered to cause total destruction?

Never...

 

[eots]

how about you run along *****..you have nothing relevant offer you could not debate this subject if your life depended on it

How about you run along, *****.
You, like the rest of the foil-hat brigade, have never offered anything of value on this subject.

why don't you tell us again how NIST determined the collapse wtc 7 was from structural damage...lol

How 'bout you put the magnifying glass and tweezers down and leave your pecker alone, Princess.

You clearly have lost the debate...again

there is no "debate" with the tinfoil hat types.

you are completely far to uniformed to have an actual debate on the topic..that's why you never even try to directly address any of the evidence and use nothing but strawmen and ad hominem