WTC building 7

[lake avenue]

jet fuel can't melt steel beams

... but it can heat it enough to weaken it's structural integrity.

FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength, which requires much less heat.

"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

Fires which came from other buildings that were burning from jet fuel.

This page has a video of it happening.
Footage that kills the conspiracy theories Rare footage shows WTC 7 consumed by fire Daily Mail Online

If you are implying that WTC 7 was brought down by intense heat from the fires, YOU ARE WRONG.

Steel structure framed buildings simply DO NOT collapse due to fire.

except they do, I literally just gave you all the facts and temperatures that would cause this event to happen. if you don't like facts then I guess what you've said is true

There were radom office fires contained to a few floors..none of the little forensic testings shows temperatures from fire required for failure..no steel framed building before or after 9/11 has ever collapsed due to fire and none of this would explain a free-fall collapse

no steel framed building before or after 9/11 has ever been hit by debris from another building while the integrity was challenged by fire. if you're trying to tell me that 275,000 pound planes travelling at 430 MPH (north tower) and 500 MPH (south tower) and ramming into a skyscraper would not cause debris to hit adjacent buildings, then I don't know what to tell you.

The fires burned out of control, this made floor beams near column 79 to expand and push a key girder off its seat that was originally disturbed by debris, this triggered the floors to fail around column 79 on Floors 8 to 14. With a loss of lateral support across nine floors, column 79 buckled, pulling the east penthouse and nearby columns down with it. With the buckling of these critical columns, the collapse then progressed east-to-west across the core, ultimately overloading the perimeter support, which buckled between Floors 7 and 17, causing the remaining portion of the building above to fall downward as a single unit. The fires, fueled by office contents, along with the lack of water, were the key reasons for the collapse.

 

[eots]

So we are to believe that George Bush coordinated a Terrorist attack and ordered the sabotage of the World Trade Center Buildings causing the collapses and the deaths of thousands to justify a war on Iraq, correct? Yes or no?

are to believe NIST that this building collapsed at free-fall speed in a symmetric collapse from office fires is the question

 

[Hollie]

So we are to believe that George Bush coordinated a Terrorist attack and ordered the sabotage of the World Trade Center Buildings causing the collapses and the deaths of thousands to justify a war on Iraq, correct? Yes or no?

are to believe NIST that this building collapsed at free-fall speed in a symmetric collapse from office fires is the question
View attachment 40021

Are we to believe that you are anything but a goofy conspiracy theorist.

 

[MarathonMike]

Answer the question Yes or No? I believe that these attacks were not a Bush lead Conspiracy and the buildings were not rigged. What is your answer?

 

[eots]

Fires which came from other buildings that were burning from jet fuel.

This page has a video of it happening.
Footage that kills the conspiracy theories Rare footage shows WTC 7 consumed by fire Daily Mail Online

If you are implying that WTC 7 was brought down by intense heat from the fires, YOU ARE WRONG.

Steel structure framed buildings simply DO NOT collapse due to fire.

except they do, I literally just gave you all the facts and temperatures that would cause this event to happen. if you don't like facts then I guess what you've said is true

There were radom office fires contained to a few floors..none of the little forensic testings shows temperatures from fire required for failure..no steel framed building before or after 9/11 has ever collapsed due to fire and none of this would explain a free-fall collapse

no steel framed building before or after 9/11 has ever been hit by debris from another building while the integrity was challenged by fire. if you're trying to tell me that 275,000 pound planes travelling at 430 MPH (north tower) and 500 MPH (south tower) and ramming into a skyscraper would not cause debris to hit adjacent buildings, then I don't know what to tell you.

The fires burned out of control, this made floor beams near column 79 to expand and push a key girder off its seat that was originally disturbed by debris, this triggered the floors to fail around column 79 on Floors 8 to 14. With a loss of lateral support across nine floors, column 79 buckled, pulling the east penthouse and nearby columns down with it. With the buckling of these critical columns, the collapse then progressed east-to-west across the core, ultimately overloading the perimeter support, which buckled between Floors 7 and 17, causing the remaining portion of the building above to fall downward as a single unit. The fires, fueled by office contents, along with the lack of water, were the key reasons for the collapse.

NIST determined damage from falling debris was not a factor in the collapse and fire alone was the cause, NIST found the loss of column 79 under any circumstace would have intiated the collapse sequence

 

[eots]

Answer the question Yes or No? I believe that these attacks were not a Bush lead Conspiracy and the buildings were not rigged. What is your answer?

I would refer you back to the OP and its assertion
The NIST report denied and excluded evidence and failed to provide a plausible scenario for the collapse of WTC 7

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What was the motive for the all powerful conspiracy to secretly sabotage this building?

it's what they do?

none of the conspiracy makes any rational sense

 

[eots]

What was the motive for the all powerful conspiracy to secretly sabotage this building?

it's what they do?

none of the conspiracy makes any rational sense

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Nothing up my sleeve, presto!

GAITHERSBURG, Maryland -- The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has released its long-awaited report on the collapse of World Trade 7 following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. "Our take-home message today is that the reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery," NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder told journalists at this morning's press conference in Gaithersburg, Md. "WTC 7 collapsed because of fires fueled by office furnishings. It did not collapse from explosives or from diesel fuel fires."

World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9 11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest​

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

And that's the way it was...

Spurred by conspiracy theorists' questions, investigators did look specifically at the possibility that explosives were involved. "Hypothetical blast events did not play a role in the collapse of WTC 7," the report states, adding that investigators "found no evidence whose explanation required invocation of a blast event." Moreover, the smallest charge capable of initiating column failure "would have resulted in a sound level of 130 dB [decibels] to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile." Witnesses did not report hearing such a loud noise, nor is one audible on recordings of the collapse.

World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9 11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest​

 

[eots]

Nothing up my sleeve, presto!

GAITHERSBURG, Maryland -- The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has released its long-awaited report on the collapse of World Trade 7 following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. "Our take-home message today is that the reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery," NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder told journalists at this morning's press conference in Gaithersburg, Md. "WTC 7 collapsed because of fires fueled by office furnishings. It did not collapse from explosives or from diesel fuel fires."

World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9 11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest​

office fires do not create a symmetrical collapses of steel framed hi-rise buildings at free fall speed

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

View attachment 39805

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Nothing up my sleeve, presto!

GAITHERSBURG, Maryland -- The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has released its long-awaited report on the collapse of World Trade 7 following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. "Our take-home message today is that the reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery," NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder told journalists at this morning's press conference in Gaithersburg, Md. "WTC 7 collapsed because of fires fueled by office furnishings. It did not collapse from explosives or from diesel fuel fires."

World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9 11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest​

office fires do not create a symmetrical collapses of steel framed hi-rise buildings at free fall speed

The link explains how it does. I guess you haven't read what you are replying to?

After 7 hours of uncontrolled fires, a steel girder on Floor 13 lost its connection to one of the 81 columns supporting the building. Floor 13 collapsed, beginning a cascade of floor failures to Floor 5. Column 79, no longer supported by a girder, buckled, triggering a rapid succession of structural failures that moved from east to west. All 23 central columns, followed by the exterior columns, failed in what's known as a "progressive collapse"--that is, local damage that spreads from one structural element to another, eventually resulting in the collapse of the entire structure.

The report clarifies a number of widely debated issues concerning the collapse, particularly the role of the building's many diesel fuel tanks and the importance of structural damage from falling WTC 1 debris. Both of those factors have been cited by investigators as possibly contributing to the collapse; the 2006 Popular Mechanics book Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts mentions both hypotheses. However, the final NIST report downplays both scenarios...


.... In fact, the report concludes: "Even without the structural damage, WTC 7 would have collapsed from fires."

The report determines that the actual culprit in the collapse was the combustion of ordinary building furnishings: "These uncontrolled fires had characteristics similar to those that have occurred previously in tall buildings." If the sprinkler system in WTC 7 had been working, it is likely that "the fires in WTC 7 would have been controlled and the collapse prevented." The report also suggests that current engineering standards for coping with fire-induced thermal expansion need to be re-examined, particularly for buildings like WTC 7 that have long, unsupported floor spans. A key factor in the collapse, NIST concluded, was the failure of structural "connections that were designed to resist gravity loads, but not thermally induced lateral loads." According to Sunder: "For the first time we have shown that fire can induce a progressive collapse."

World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9 11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest​

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What was the motive for the all powerful conspiracy to secretly sabotage this building?

it's what they do?

none of the conspiracy makes any rational sense

what does a video prove?

 

[eots]

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What was the motive for the all powerful conspiracy to secretly sabotage this building?

it's what they do?

none of the conspiracy makes any rational sense

Air France flight 358 didn't hit a steel building at 500 miles an hour. It didn't even burn the fuel in the wings, yet its aluminum skin melted to the ground. It simply went off the runway and caught fire. What melted the airliner was its contents, like seats, clothing and other combustibles including chemical oxygen generators. It's not unreasonable to conclude the airliner and contents didn't even need the contents of the building to melt. Yet the NIST replicated the fires by burning office furniture in a controlled experiment and found the ceiling temperature to reach 1,100 degrees C. (They say "Yeah but that's the ceiling" to which I say "Now imagine what the actual flame is.. Do you think it's cooler?") More than enough to melt aircraft aluminum as well. Unfortunately, they weren't charged with putting conspiracy theorists fears to rest so they didn't include a piece of aircraft aluminum in the test.

More evidence that normal fires without jet fuel added can reach over 1000 degrees C is an experiment conducted by One Stop Shop in Structural Fire Engineering, Professor Colin Bailey, University of Manchester.

Debunking 9 11 Conspiracy Theories and Controlled Demolition - Molten Steel

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

...

 

[eots]

What was the motive for the all powerful conspiracy to secretly sabotage this building?

it's what they do?

none of the conspiracy makes any rational sense

what does a video prove?

he denies and lies about multiple eye witnesses ,samples and photographic evidence of molten metal at all three buildings...just as they deny explosions recorded and wittnessed

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What was the motive for the all powerful conspiracy to secretly sabotage this building?

it's what they do?

none of the conspiracy makes any rational sense

what does a video prove?

he denies and lies about multiple eye witnesses ,samples and photographic evidence of molten metal at all three buildings...just as they deny explosions recorded and wittnessed

who collected samples and photos?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What was the motive for the all powerful conspiracy to secretly sabotage this building?

it's what they do?

none of the conspiracy makes any rational sense

what does a video prove?

he denies and lies about multiple eye witnesses ,samples and photographic evidence of molten metal at all three buildings...just as they deny explosions recorded and wittnessed

eye witnesses to what and who are these eye witnesses?