Buildings more "Collapse" resistant when they aren't capable of swaying world support

[creativedreams]

Somehow Buildings that aren't capable of gaining world support to go where the oil is are far more "collapse" resistant...

Look how the firefighters didn't give up on this building that was burning 100's of times worse than building 7

The firefighters worked through the night battling this fire.



Live News Footage BBC:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=th2bnG_7UyY"]YouTube- Windsor Building Fire BBC Report[/ame]

 

[Christophera]

Somehow Buildings that aren't capable of gaining world support to go where the oil is are far more "collapse" resistant...

WTC 7 was rebuilt with a concrete core.

Rebuilding 7 World Trade Center

So is the freedom tower. Over a certain height and they are subject to torsion oscillation in the high winds if they have only a steel core. It can take a tower down faster than fire.

The steel reinforced cast concrete rectangular tube has tremendous resistance to torsion.

 

[manu1959]

apples and oranges....two different stuctural systems....two different fire supression systems....

 

[Christophera]

apples and oranges....two different stuctural systems....two different fire supression systems....

If fire was the issue, that might mean something.

No core columns visible, looks like rebar.

Looks like concrete.

Got photo from 9-11 showing steel core columns in the core area?

 

[Fizz]

apples and oranges....two different stuctural systems....two different fire supression systems....

If fire was the issue, that might mean something.

No core columns visible, looks like rebar.

Looks like concrete.

Got photo from 9-11 showing steel core columns in the core area?

no rebar in your photo. you cant see something 3 inches wide from over a mile away.

you show steel core columns on 9/11 all the time,. you fucking moron.

there's two pictures of the steel core in the post i just quoted.

 

[Fizz]

Somehow Buildings that aren't capable of gaining world support to go where the oil is are far more "collapse" resistant...

looks like concrete columns so its not of the same construction as the WTC towers.

Look how the firefighters didn't give up on this building that was burning 100's of times worse than building 7

The firefighters worked through the night battling this fire.

how many other tall buildings were burning that night? did the fire department have 343 firefighters killed earlier the same day?

we wont even go into the lack of water pressure and how much of the fire equipment was already destroyed earlier in the day.

you really are a moron.

 

[Christophera]

apples and oranges....two different stuctural systems....two different fire supression systems....

If fire was the issue, that might mean something.

No core columns visible, looks like rebar.

Looks like concrete.

Got photo from 9-11 showing steel core columns in the core area?

no rebar in your photo. you cant see something 3 inches wide from over a mile away.

Not true, a 3 inch silhouetted bar will just show and there are 50 or more of them in perhaps the wet and north wall lines. You certainly have provided no reasonable alternative. I state there was high tensile steel 3 Inch rebar and that material is capable of standing exactly as we see,

you show steel core columns on 9/11 all the time,. you fucking moron.

there's two pictures of the steel core in the post i just quoted.

You never did post images of steel core columns in the core area.

You and gumjob at one time posted an image that showed one that came from the first row inside the core wall that was falling out with interior box columns. The tapered bottom portion shows a pice of the concrete core wall still fastened to it.

You lie, you have never posted an image of steel core columns in the core area, no one has. They did not exist.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No water pressure and the building was in danger, they had already lost over 300 fire fighters they were not interested in losing more to save a building that did not need to be saved.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Somehow Buildings that aren't capable of gaining world support to go where the oil is are far more "collapse" resistant...

Look how the firefighters didn't give up on this building that was burning 100's of times worse than building 7

The firefighters worked through the night battling this fire.



Live News Footage BBC:
YouTube- Windsor Building Fire BBC Report

Did that building have a fully loaded, fully fueled JUMBO jet travelling at more than 600 mph ram into it and rock it's foundation?

Why of course not!

 

[Fizz]

If fire was the issue, that might mean something.

No core columns visible, looks like rebar.

Looks like concrete.

Got photo from 9-11 showing steel core columns in the core area?

no rebar in your photo. you cant see something 3 inches wide from over a mile away.

Not true, a 3 inch silhouetted bar will just show and there are 50 or more of them in perhaps the wet and north wall lines. You certainly have provided no reasonable alternative. I state there was high tensile steel 3 Inch rebar and that material is capable of standing exactly as we see,

you cant see something 3 inches from over a mile away. take a look at your picture and tell me where you can see even on person, which is much thicker than 3 inches, on the other side of the river!!!

where is your proof that there are "50 or more of them"? once again you are just making shit up as you go along. what you have a picture of is what remains of the steel core.

you show steel core columns on 9/11 all the time,. you fucking moron.

there's two pictures of the steel core in the post i just quoted.

You never did post images of steel core columns in the core area.

You and gumjob at one time posted an image that showed one that came from the first row inside the core wall that was falling out with interior box columns. The tapered bottom portion shows a pice of the concrete core wall still fastened to it.

You lie, you have never posted an image of steel core columns in the core area, no one has. They did not exist.

this picture that you just posted is a pciture of the steel core on 9/11, you fucking idiot!!! its STEEEEEEL!!!!!! there is no concrete in your picture.

 

[Gamolon]

Somehow Buildings that aren't capable of gaining world support to go where the oil is are far more "collapse" resistant...

You use that photo and then use the description "collapse resistant"? Let me ask you creative. What part of that building in the above photo collapsed?

Oh that's right! The STEEL part.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Somehow Buildings that aren't capable of gaining world support to go where the oil is are far more "collapse" resistant...

Look how the firefighters didn't give up on this building that was burning 100's of times worse than building 7

The firefighters worked through the night battling this fire.



Live News Footage BBC:
YouTube- Windsor Building Fire BBC Report

Did that building have a fully loaded, fully fueled JUMBO jet travelling at more than 600 mph ram into it and rock it's foundation?

Why of course not!

Hey Bush dupe,if you had ever done any research in your life,you would know that the designers of the towers ANTICIPATED that when they built the towers.The onsite construction manager of the towers who had a suit in the the towers and died that day said in jan 10 on modern marvels,they designed that in mind making the structures so strong that it could take hits from MULTIPLE airliners and would still remain standing. stop being an idiot and listening to the corporate controlled media and look at alternative news sources that cover REAL news. did the towers fall when the planse struck it immediatley? no thats cause they were able to take the hits. duh. The fire was the official explanation of the collapse anyways.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Somehow Buildings that aren't capable of gaining world support to go where the oil is are far more "collapse" resistant...

You use that photo and then use the description "collapse resistant"? Let me ask you creative. What part of that building in the above photo collapsed?

Oh that's right! The STEEL part.

hey moron disinfo agent,the structure is STILL there,it did not collapse.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

apples and oranges....two different stuctural systems....two different fire supression systems....

the only problem with that explanation that you disinfo agents cant get around is that the towers caught fire in the 70's as well with RAGING fires far worse than these were,so intense that they were described in the new york times that the tower lit up like a torch,yet the trade center never collapsed.nice try though.

 

[Fizz]

apples and oranges....two different stuctural systems....two different fire supression systems....

the only problem with that explanation that you disinfo agents cant get around is that the towers caught fire in the 70's as well with RAGING fires far worse than these were,so intense that they were described in the new york times that the tower lit up like a torch,yet the trade center never collapsed.nice try though.

anyone that calls every person that disagrees with them a "disinfo agent" should be put in a straight jacket.

you truly are a moron. sheep laugh at you because you follow people around so blindly.

 

[Fizz]

apples and oranges....two different stuctural systems....two different fire supression systems....

the only problem with that explanation that you disinfo agents cant get around is that the towers caught fire in the 70's as well with RAGING fires far worse than these were,so intense that they were described in the new york times that the tower lit up like a torch,yet the trade center never collapsed.nice try though.

wow.... then there must be millions of pictures of something as spectacular as the world trade center lit up like a torch and burning WORSE than on 9/11.

why dont you show us some?

 

[candycorn]

Were there two aircraft crashes and the wreckage of two 110 story buildings hitting the building and setting that fire?