Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-11-2019, 02:35 PM
namahoo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 9

WTC7 collapse, new numerical results


Hello all,

The long-awaited study from the University of Alaska/Fairbanks was out a few days back, with appropriate media coverage. But if you missed it, here's a heads up.

They seem to rule out NIST's proposed collapse mechanism and their simulation of simultaneous failure of all columns is uncannily like the real-life collapse.

What do you make of it?
  #2  
Old 09-11-2019, 02:38 PM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19,069
No, what do you make of it?
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #3  
Old 09-11-2019, 02:44 PM
snfaulkner's Avatar
snfaulkner is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: 123 Fake Street
Posts: 8,152
Link?
__________________
It may be because I'm a drooling simpleton with the attention span of a demented gnat, but would you mind explaining everything in words of one syllable. 140 chars max.
  #4  
Old 09-11-2019, 02:47 PM
Hermitian's Avatar
Hermitian is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,586
The last sentences from the draft report:

Quote:
It is our conclusion that the collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near simultaneous failure of all columns in the building and not a progressive collapse involving the sequential failure of columns throughout the building.
Despite simulating a number of hypothetical scenarios, we were unable to identify any progressive sequence of failures that could have taken place on September 11, 2001, and caused a total collapse of the building, let alone the observed straight-down collapse with approximately 2.5 seconds of free fall and minimal differential movement of the exterior.
This is more of a "what happened" conclusion not a "why it happened" conclusion.

There does not appear to be a discussion of why there was a global failure. Me? I am going with aliens.

Last edited by Hermitian; 09-11-2019 at 02:49 PM.
  #5  
Old 09-11-2019, 02:51 PM
Telemark's Avatar
Telemark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Just outside of Titletown
Posts: 22,997
Dr Hulsey has been doing work for Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, who appear to have commissioned this study, for several years. While he claims to be a forensic structural engineer, it appears he has no specific training in that area. He is a well trained and respected civil engineer otherwise.

I don't have the engineering chops to review the paper, I'll let others do that. But at first glance I am suspect of a report commissioned by quacks that happens to support their primary thesis.
  #6  
Old 09-11-2019, 02:52 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,621
Quote:
Prepared for:
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth
Those nutcases commissioned this paper?

Last edited by Czarcasm; 09-11-2019 at 02:53 PM.
  #7  
Old 09-11-2019, 02:53 PM
CairoCarol is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 5,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by namahoo View Post
The long-awaited study from the University of Alaska/Fairbanks was out a few days back, with appropriate media coverage.
(Bolding mine.) Which is to say, coverage from the university itself, a few scattered sources in Alaska, and sites with monikers involving "9/11truth" and such. Places like Reuters and CNN haven't jumped on the study. I'm guessing that's "appropriate."
__________________
If I waited for memory to serve, I'd starve.
  #8  
Old 09-11-2019, 02:58 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,621
Quote:
Originally Posted by namahoo View Post
Hello all,

The long-awaited study from the University of Alaska/Fairbanks was out a few days back, with appropriate media coverage. But if you missed it, here's a heads up.

They seem to rule out NIST's proposed collapse mechanism and their simulation of simultaneous failure of all columns is uncannily like the real-life collapse.

What do you make of it?
What brought this to your attention, and what do you think about it?
  #9  
Old 09-11-2019, 02:59 PM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 40,003
All I can find is from 2017. I can't tell if this is newer than that.

The first thing that occurs to me is that if it was controlled demolition, why was it only in WTC7, and did the airliners crashing into the other towers cause those to collapse but not WTC7?

No idea how reputable Dr. Leroy Hulsey is among his peers.

Regards,
Shodan
  #10  
Old 09-11-2019, 03:10 PM
Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 31,656
Just to provide a link: Breaking: UAF study says government wrong on World Trade Center collapse.
  #11  
Old 09-11-2019, 03:20 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,621
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase View Post
Subtitled "ALASKA-LED TEAM VINDICATES 911 ‘TRUTHERS’"
Inspires confidence in the report, don't it?
  #12  
Old 09-11-2019, 03:27 PM
Velocity is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,422
Let's sidestep the physics and math for a moment. One issue 9/11 Truthers have never answered is why the U.S. government (or whoever was nefarious enough to rig this thing) would want to knock down WTC7. What does knocking down the relatively-obscure, little-known building called WTC7 get them that knocking down the two big Twin Towers alone didn't?
  #13  
Old 09-11-2019, 03:41 PM
CurtC is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermitian View Post
The last sentences from the draft report:
Quote:
It is our conclusion that the collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near simultaneous failure of all columns in the building and not a progressive collapse involving the sequential failure of columns throughout the building.
Despite simulating a number of hypothetical scenarios, we were unable to identify any progressive sequence of failures that could have taken place on September 11, 2001, and caused a total collapse of the building, let alone the observed straight-down collapse with approximately 2.5 seconds of free fall and minimal differential movement of the exterior.
Wow, that summary is just dripping with 9/11 Truther talking points.

I would hope that the structural physics world would look into it and then see if it still stands. However, I don't think any real working experts will actually waste their time with it.
  #14  
Old 09-11-2019, 03:47 PM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 35,541
Quote:
Originally Posted by namahoo View Post
Hello all,

The long-awaited study from the University of Alaska/Fairbanks was out a few days back, with appropriate media coverage. But if you missed it, here's a heads up.

They seem to rule out NIST's proposed collapse mechanism and their simulation of simultaneous failure of all columns is uncannily like the real-life collapse.

What do you make of it?
I've never understood why this building fascinates the 9/11 Truther CT types, to be honest. There really aren't any mysteries as to why the building collapsed. Basically, a ton of building material fell on it from the other WTC tower collapses (BURNING debris at that), and due to water main breaks and, kind of other priorities happening the building was left burning all day without fire fighters really doing much (read: anything).

I did look up a NIST FAQ page on WTC 7, for anyone interested. Been a while since I looked into this (since the last crazy 9/11 Truther came here to discuss it), but I recall seeing some of the models and it seems more than plausible that, along with the initial damage to structural supports facing the tower collapse damaged sections, the fire weakened the rest of the supports over hours of uncontrolled burning, leading to a collapse. Certainly there is zero evidence of explosives or anything like that, so seems a red herring to me to talk about simultaneous collapse in some sort of sinister tones.

Since the OP didn't link to this great report, and since it seems, unsurprisingly to have come from 9/11 CTer types I don't really think it's worth looking at. If the OP felt there was something compelling in there I figure s/he would have linked to and quoted it. What do I make of it? Last gasp by the 9/11 Truther types to try and get some traction for their crazy theories would be my guess.
__________________
-XT

That's what happens when you let rednecks play with anti-matter!

Last edited by XT; 09-11-2019 at 03:48 PM.
  #15  
Old 09-11-2019, 03:49 PM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by CurtC View Post
Wow, that summary is just dripping with 9/11 Truther talking points.
...
However, I don't think any real working experts will actually waste their time with it.
I suspect the people who "commissioned" this study are counting on the fact that no reputable authority will actually waste their time on debunking more of this bullshit.

Also, there is some comments on the linked site that says they will solicit public opinion prior to publishing the full results of the study later this year. Sounds completely legit to me.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #16  
Old 09-11-2019, 03:55 PM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
Since the OP didn't link to this great report, and since it seems, unsurprisingly to have come from 9/11 CTer types I don't really think it's worth looking at. If the OP felt there was something compelling in there I figure s/he would have linked to and quoted it. What do I make of it? Last gasp by the 9/11 Truther types to try and get some traction for their crazy theories would be my guess.
The linked site says the report is not yet published. They wish to solicit public opinion first. Target date is end of 2019:

Quote:
There will be a two-month public comment period from September 3 to November 1, 2019, with the final report to be released later this year.

“During this period, we welcome any and all members of the public to submit constructive comments intended to further the analyses and presentation of findings contained in the report.
IOW: Submit your lunatic fringe conspiracy theories to us and we'll try to include them in the report.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #17  
Old 09-11-2019, 03:56 PM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 35,541
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
The linked site says the report is not yet published. They wish to solicit public opinion first. Target date is end of 2019:



IOW: Submit your lunatic fringe conspiracy theories to us and we'll try to include them in the report.
Well, you know, ALL peer reviewed papers are generally submitted to solicit public opinion first....right? Right?? Isn't that how it works???

__________________
-XT

That's what happens when you let rednecks play with anti-matter!
  #18  
Old 09-11-2019, 04:07 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase View Post
mustreadalaska.com ??

No. Must NOT read. Just due to the domain name. Life is too short.
  #19  
Old 09-11-2019, 04:31 PM
Sunny Daze's Avatar
Sunny Daze is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bay Area Urban Sprawl
Posts: 12,864
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
{...} What do I make of it? Last gasp by the 9/11 Truther types to try and get some traction for their crazy theories would be my guess.
Oh, you crazy dreamer you.
  #20  
Old 09-11-2019, 05:38 PM
Bryan Ekers's Avatar
Bryan Ekers is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 59,257
Here's some numerical results for you:

There used to be 1 building called WTC7.
Now there are 0 buildings called WTC7.
__________________
Don't worry about the end of Inception. We have top men working on it right now. Top. Men.
  #21  
Old 09-11-2019, 05:42 PM
LAZombie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 318
Explain this:

(1) Why did all three buildings collapse symmetrically as in a controlled demolition?
(2) Why did all three buildings collapse at free fall rates of speed ?
(3) WTC7 wasn't hit by a plane. Why would normal office furnishings and material cause such a massive structural collapse?
(4) Why wasn't the steel from the structures analyzed for explosives and why was it shipped to China for scrap rather than keeping for it for analysis of a crime beyond the government issued explanation?
(5) What were the explosions that many people heard?
(6) How could there be molten steel under ruins three months after the collapse?
(7) How did the fire get so "bad" in a relatively modern structure that would surely pass code?
(8) Why has no other skyscraper collapsed the way these three buildings did?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=LgYNPaO1rNY

Last edited by LAZombie; 09-11-2019 at 05:43 PM.
  #22  
Old 09-11-2019, 06:06 PM
snfaulkner's Avatar
snfaulkner is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: 123 Fake Street
Posts: 8,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAZombie View Post
Explain this:

(1) Why did all three buildings collapse symmetrically as in a controlled demolition?
(2) Why did all three buildings collapse at free fall rates of speed ?
(3) WTC7 wasn't hit by a plane. Why would normal office furnishings and material cause such a massive structural collapse?
(4) Why wasn't the steel from the structures analyzed for explosives and why was it shipped to China for scrap rather than keeping for it for analysis of a crime beyond the government issued explanation?
(5) What were the explosions that many people heard?
(6) How could there be molten steel under ruins three months after the collapse?
(7) How did the fire get so "bad" in a relatively modern structure that would surely pass code?
(8) Why has no other skyscraper collapsed the way these three buildings did?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=LgYNPaO1rNY
Oh boy. All together now..."Here we go again."
__________________
It may be because I'm a drooling simpleton with the attention span of a demented gnat, but would you mind explaining everything in words of one syllable. 140 chars max.
  #23  
Old 09-11-2019, 06:13 PM
kirkrapine is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermitian View Post
There does not appear to be a discussion of why there was a global failure. Me? I am going with aliens.
Go with them, by all means, and enjoy your anal probe.
  #24  
Old 09-11-2019, 06:16 PM
kirkrapine is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 381
Of course, there's always the compromise theory.
  #25  
Old 09-11-2019, 06:21 PM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAZombie View Post
Explain this:

(1) Why did all three buildings collapse symmetrically as in a controlled demolition?
(2) Why did all three buildings collapse at free fall rates of speed ?
(3) WTC7 wasn't hit by a plane. Why would normal office furnishings and material cause such a massive structural collapse?
(4) Why wasn't the steel from the structures analyzed for explosives and why was it shipped to China for scrap rather than keeping for it for analysis of a crime beyond the government issued explanation?
(5) What were the explosions that many people heard?
(6) How could there be molten steel under ruins three months after the collapse?
(7) How did the fire get so "bad" in a relatively modern structure that would surely pass code?
(8) Why has no other skyscraper collapsed the way these three buildings did?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=LgYNPaO1rNY
Jig is up, guys; He's on to us! Quickly now, everybody back to HQ-A51 for decontamination and departure.

Leave the illudium Q-36 explosive space modulator -- take the cannoli.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #26  
Old 09-11-2019, 06:45 PM
Willcross is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 341
I've often wondered what the government would have done had the buildings not collapsed. Imagine if the two towers were just looming over NYC dangerously unstable yet refused to fall. You would have to evacuate all of Manhattan indefinitely.

I struggle to think how you would even dismantle them? Certainly not safely anyway.

Last edited by Willcross; 09-11-2019 at 06:45 PM.
  #27  
Old 09-11-2019, 06:57 PM
LAZombie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 318
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Jig is up, guys; He's on to us! Quickly now, everybody back to HQ-A51 for decontamination and departure.

Leave the illudium Q-36 explosive space modulator -- take the cannoli.
Instead of sarcasm, why not answer question one? I thought this was a forum for intellectual debate. No?

I always accepted until the official government narrative until seeing several videos arguing something different. I'm open minded. Set me straight.
  #28  
Old 09-11-2019, 06:58 PM
Dewey Finn is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 28,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willcross View Post
I've often wondered what the government would have done had the buildings not collapsed. Imagine if the two towers were just looming over NYC dangerously unstable yet refused to fall. You would have to evacuate all of Manhattan indefinitely.

I struggle to think how you would even dismantle them? Certainly not safely anyway.
This Cecil Adams column mentions some methods that could be used to deconstruct a skyscraper, although I don't think the usual methods would be possible if the buildings were not intact.

Last edited by Dewey Finn; 09-11-2019 at 06:59 PM.
  #29  
Old 09-11-2019, 07:01 PM
snfaulkner's Avatar
snfaulkner is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: 123 Fake Street
Posts: 8,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAZombie View Post
Instead of sarcasm, why not answer question one? I thought this was a forum for intellectual debate. No?

I always accepted until the official government narrative until seeing several videos arguing something different. I'm open minded. Set me straight.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/9/11
__________________
It may be because I'm a drooling simpleton with the attention span of a demented gnat, but would you mind explaining everything in words of one syllable. 140 chars max.
  #30  
Old 09-11-2019, 07:05 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,621
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAZombie View Post
Explain this:

(1) Why did all three buildings collapse symmetrically as in a controlled demolition?
(2) Why did all three buildings collapse at free fall rates of speed ?
(3) WTC7 wasn't hit by a plane. Why would normal office furnishings and material cause such a massive structural collapse?
(4) Why wasn't the steel from the structures analyzed for explosives and why was it shipped to China for scrap rather than keeping for it for analysis of a crime beyond the government issued explanation?
(5) What were the explosions that many people heard?
(6) How could there be molten steel under ruins three months after the collapse?
(7) How did the fire get so "bad" in a relatively modern structure that would surely pass code?
(8) Why has no other skyscraper collapsed the way these three buildings did?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=LgYNPaO1rNY
Been there, done that, got the t-shirt, saw the movie, read the novelization of the movie, got the action figures, got a complete set of the collector cards, ate the cereal, played the card game, played the video game, got the bobblehead, tried the beer, read the blog, watched the vlog, saw the music video and gave at the office.
  #31  
Old 09-11-2019, 07:07 PM
Skywatcher's Avatar
Skywatcher is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere in the Potomac
Posts: 35,079
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAZombie View Post
Explain this:

(1) Why did all three buildings collapse symmetrically as in a controlled demolition?
(2) Why did all three buildings collapse at free fall rates of speed ?
(3) WTC7 wasn't hit by a plane. Why would normal office furnishings and material cause such a massive structural collapse?
(4) Why wasn't the steel from the structures analyzed for explosives and why was it shipped to China for scrap rather than keeping for it for analysis of a crime beyond the government issued explanation?
(5) What were the explosions that many people heard?
(6) How could there be molten steel under ruins three months after the collapse?
(7) How did the fire get so "bad" in a relatively modern structure that would surely pass code?
(8) Why has no other skyscraper collapsed the way these three buildings did?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=LgYNPaO1rNY
(1) They didn't.
(2) Gravity.
(3) WTC7 got hit by a very large chunk of WTC1.
(4) If the steel was immediately sent to China, what was all that metal at the Fresh Kills landfill for nearly a decade?
(5) The survivors from Stairwell B in WTC1 reported only hearing the tower collapsing above them, no mention of any explosions.
(6) There is no reliable source for molten anything, certainly not steel. Images supposedly showing molten anything have either been misinterpreted or outright doctored.
(7) Being property of the Port Authority, all seven buildings were exempt from codes.
(8) No other buildings utilizing the exact same construction as the original World Trade Center complex have been struck by airliners.

Last edited by Skywatcher; 09-11-2019 at 07:10 PM.
  #32  
Old 09-11-2019, 07:09 PM
Bryan Ekers's Avatar
Bryan Ekers is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 59,257
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAZombie View Post
Explain this:
Faulty assumptions based on bad information.


That was easy.
__________________
Don't worry about the end of Inception. We have top men working on it right now. Top. Men.
  #33  
Old 09-11-2019, 07:12 PM
beowulff's Avatar
beowulff is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Scottsdale, more-or-less
Posts: 16,822
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willcross View Post
I've often wondered what the government would have done had the buildings not collapsed. Imagine if the two towers were just looming over NYC dangerously unstable yet refused to fall. You would have to evacuate all of Manhattan indefinitely.

I struggle to think how you would even dismantle them? Certainly not safely anyway.
Well, no.
Even if they didn't fall, you'd only have to evacuate the Lower Manhattan area - the WTC buildings aren't going to crush the Empire State Building if they fell...
  #34  
Old 09-11-2019, 07:18 PM
Skywatcher's Avatar
Skywatcher is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere in the Potomac
Posts: 35,079
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Let's sidestep the physics and math for a moment. One issue 9/11 Truthers have never answered is why the U.S. government (or whoever was nefarious enough to rig this thing) would want to knock down WTC7. What does knocking down the relatively-obscure, little-known building called WTC7 get them that knocking down the two big Twin Towers alone didn't?
Supposedly because that's where their "let's demolish the WTC" HQ was. Never mind the fact that it would have been simpler to toss all the "evidence" into one of these truck-sized industrial shredders.
  #35  
Old 09-11-2019, 07:54 PM
Northern Piper is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: The snow is back, dammit!
Posts: 29,759
Quote:
Originally Posted by CurtC View Post
I would hope that the structural physics world would look into it and then see if it still stands.

I thought that the whole point of the discussion is that WTC 7 isn't still standing.
__________________
"I don't like to make plans for the day. If I do, that's when words like 'premeditated' start getting thrown around in the courtroom."

Last edited by Northern Piper; 09-11-2019 at 07:55 PM.
  #36  
Old 09-11-2019, 08:04 PM
l0k1 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 281
We have a building here in Baltimore called The World Trade Center. It's the world's tallest pentagonal building. In front of it there is a very large chunk of steel from that other Wolrd Trade Center. It's a memorial, but maybe you could come here and test the steel for government agents. I haven't looked into it, but I wouldn't be surprised if other cities also had big chunks, I'd also be surprised if none of the scrap ended up at Sparrows Point, which is close to Canton, but far from China.
  #37  
Old 09-11-2019, 08:09 PM
Buck Godot's Avatar
Buck Godot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MD outside DC
Posts: 6,017
The real question is why did the government want to destroy an abandoned high rise in Brazil , a small flat of apartments in Mexico city (using a convenient earthquake to cover their crimes).
  #38  
Old 09-11-2019, 08:10 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Been there, done that, got the t-shirt, saw the movie, read the novelization of the movie, got the action figures, got a complete set of the collector cards, ate the cereal, played the card game, played the video game, got the bobblehead, tried the beer, read the blog, watched the vlog, saw the music video and gave at the office.
You don't have the coffee mug or the commemorative condoms?
  #39  
Old 09-11-2019, 08:16 PM
snfaulkner's Avatar
snfaulkner is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: 123 Fake Street
Posts: 8,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
You don't have the coffee mug or the commemorative condoms?
The mug fell at freefall speeds and the condoms were were burned up by the thermite straps.
__________________
It may be because I'm a drooling simpleton with the attention span of a demented gnat, but would you mind explaining everything in words of one syllable. 140 chars max.
  #40  
Old 09-11-2019, 08:30 PM
Moriarty's Avatar
Moriarty is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 2,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAZombie View Post
Explain this:
Answer this:
What became of the airplanes that took off that morning and never landed safely?

What became of the people who were on those planes?
  #41  
Old 09-11-2019, 08:34 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moriarty View Post
Answer this:
What became of the airplanes that took off that morning and never landed safely?

What became of the people who were on those planes?
I personally picked aircraft wreckage out of the rubble at the Pentagon. So I'm pretty sure where that airplane went.

Of course, I could be part of the conspiracy.
  #42  
Old 09-11-2019, 08:37 PM
LAZombie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skywatcher View Post
(1) They didn't.
(2) Gravity.
(3) WTC7 got hit by a very large chunk of WTC1.
(4) If the steel was immediately sent to China, what was all that metal at the Fresh Kills landfill for nearly a decade?
(5) The survivors from Stairwell B in WTC1 reported only hearing the tower collapsing above them, no mention of any explosions.
(6) There is no reliable source for molten anything, certainly not steel. Images supposedly showing molten anything have either been misinterpreted or outright doctored.
(7) Being property of the Port Authority, all seven buildings were exempt from codes.
(8) No other buildings utilizing the exact same construction as the original World Trade Center complex have been struck by airliners.
(1) Every video I've seen shows all three buildings collapsing symmetrically. One would think that one side or portion would collapse first followed by other sections. Instead everything falls at the same time.
(2) Free fall speed is the speed at which something falls without an opposing force. The lower levels of each building should have at the very least slowed the progression of the collapse.
(3) That doesn't explain the massive fuel source needed to weaken WTC7's structure.
(4) See the video. Many sources claim proper testing was not conducted.
(5) There are multiple video interviews claim hearing explosions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRaKHq2dfCI
(6) See video. Lots of interviews stating extreme heat levels.
(7) While the Port Authority was exempt from codes, that doesn't mean the building were structurally unsound and waiting to collapse. How could they have received insurance otherwise?
(8) But there have major fires in skyscrapers and nothing remotely similar has happened.

Last edited by LAZombie; 09-11-2019 at 08:38 PM.
  #43  
Old 09-11-2019, 08:39 PM
Chingon is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: the hypersphere
Posts: 646
Guys, he's seen a video.
  #44  
Old 09-11-2019, 08:41 PM
Bryan Ekers's Avatar
Bryan Ekers is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 59,257
Rebuttal of 1 through 8.... either "wrong" or "so?"
__________________
Don't worry about the end of Inception. We have top men working on it right now. Top. Men.
  #45  
Old 09-11-2019, 08:41 PM
kirkrapine is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAZombie View Post
(8) But there have major fires in skyscrapers and nothing remotely similar has happened.
Exactly.
  #46  
Old 09-11-2019, 08:53 PM
Skywatcher's Avatar
Skywatcher is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere in the Potomac
Posts: 35,079
(1) & (2) You should stop watching videos long enough to pay attention to debris patterns. A significant portion from 1 hit 7, which subsequently fell in two different directions. Likewise, a significant portion of 2, most likely part of the core, was ejected south and crushed a Greek Orthodox church across the street. There are also videos which show the cores of 2 & 1 still standing for a significant amount of time after the rest had already fallen.
(3) 7 was retrofitted to a site that had been prepped for a building with a much smaller footprint. The entire southern facade, which faced 1 & 2, had no direct contact with the ground but rather tied into other columns.
(4) I can claim that you're an actual zombie. Doesn't make me right.
(5) How many of those were actually inside one of the towers as the tower came down above them? There were reports of people hearing trains. Does that mean some subway train jumped out of the station and went straight up?
(6) "Extreme heat levels" != molten metal. There are no reliable claims of people actually seeing molten metal.
(7) Money?
(8) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwoBRHDLxdo

Last edited by Skywatcher; 09-11-2019 at 08:58 PM.
  #47  
Old 09-11-2019, 08:53 PM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chingon View Post
Guys, he's seen a video.
We're fucked if he begins stacking heavy metal washers and construction paper.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #48  
Old 09-11-2019, 08:54 PM
Moriarty's Avatar
Moriarty is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 2,885
No, this isn’t how this works.

You don’t get to just nitpick the evidence if you want to rebut the official account. You have to provide your theory of what happened, addressing what appears to have occurred.

So, I’ll try again. If you want to imply or suggest that the buildings weren’t destroyed by airplanes, what happened to those airplanes and the people onboard?

Last edited by Moriarty; 09-11-2019 at 08:57 PM.
  #49  
Old 09-11-2019, 08:58 PM
LAZombie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skywatcher View Post
Did you actually watch this video? The entire structure is in a complete conflagration. There are flames from top to bottom. This is nothing like what happened on 911.
  #50  
Old 09-11-2019, 08:58 PM
Chingon is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: the hypersphere
Posts: 646
What part of video don't you guys understand? It was on the internet!
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:37 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017