# 9/11 **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 13, 2012, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099 "2012-07-13T12:46:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/121 "2012-07-19T18:23:14Z")
> [@split\_p\_j](#): > > Like I said, nothing I’ve read says the buildings were meant to stand up to that specific condition. I have no trouble believing this at all, but it’s probably not for the reason you think. ---
**Author:** ![split\_p\_j](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e19b73/32.png) [@split\_p\_j](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/split_p_j)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/122 "2012-07-19T18:27:02Z")
> [@Garfield226](#): > > Yeah, many people jumped. Some burned to death. Others fell. I’m not sure that’s what any of them wanted. I know what you are trying to do with this, so you might as well stop right there. My point was if the fires were so bad there, they would not have even been able to get to windows to jump in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![split\_p\_j](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e19b73/32.png) [@split\_p\_j](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/split_p_j)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/123 "2012-07-19T18:28:24Z")
> [@Garfield226](#): > > I have no trouble believing this at all, but it’s probably not for the reason you think. Just to those conditions. Stop playing word games. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/124 "2012-07-19T18:29:02Z")
> [@split\_p\_j](#): > > My point was if the fires were so bad there, they would not have even been able to get to windows to jump in the first place. Yet, there they were. Clearly, your speculation is not based on empirical evidence. ---
**Author:** ![split\_p\_j](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e19b73/32.png) [@split\_p\_j](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/split_p_j)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/125 "2012-07-19T18:29:28Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > You said it looked exactly like a controlled demolition, you said explosives were used to weaken the buildings, and you said we explosives are the only way to destroy a building that size in that way. You’ve said you don’t have a specific theory, but it’s hard to work those opinions into some other theory. > It was on fire and pieces of the Twin Towers fell on it. Do you think that might explain it at all? No, for the reasons stated in my OP Are you syaing WTC 7 didn’t look like controlled demolition to you? ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/126 "2012-07-19T18:29:35Z")
> [@split\_p\_j](#): > > I know what you are trying to do with this, so you might as well stop right there. > > My point was if the fires were so bad there, they would not have even been able to get to windows to jump in the first place. So you’re saying the fires weren’t so bad? All those people must have been morons for not walking down the stairs then, if the fires weren’t so bad. Corporate tools, AMIRITE?! ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/127 "2012-07-19T18:35:05Z")
> [@split\_p\_j](#): > > No, for the reasons stated in my OP > > Are you syaing WTC 7 didn’t look like controlled demolition to you? It didn’t look like a controlled demolition to me…but that’s only because I’ve actually seen controlled demolitions before. ---
**Author:** ![split\_p\_j](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e19b73/32.png) [@split\_p\_j](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/split_p_j)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/128 "2012-07-19T18:35:25Z")
> [@Mr.Miskatonic](#): > > Not really. Read the report: > > "Unusually good application of fire resistive coating helped maintain structural integrity in fire. " > > More to the point, 383 firefighters spent time fighting the fire - WTC7 had no firefighting efforts. > > 18 hours where the PFD never once stopped pumping water on the fire, as well as a structure that was steel in concrete. > > Even with all the the building was on the verge of collapse during and after the fire. > > No. Many other things can bring buildings to total collapse, including unfought fires. > > Yet your ‘controlled demolitions’ make no sound, unlike every other controlled demolition in history. Your ‘random fires’ were pretty engulfing by the way. > > The bolded part simply is not true. They had no way of calculating such damage when the built the thing. > > Never mind that the fuel that didn’t explode outside set all the flammable materials inside ablaze > > Unsurprising if you think about it. That is where the least amount of consumables remained. > > Drills are run quite frequently. BTW, the drill actually meant a better response as people were in place, rather than in coffee breaks, etc. Not a net benefit for the terrorists. > > You are completely wrong. Really, the response what better because of the drills? Have you even listened to the tapes? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/129 "2012-07-19T18:35:44Z")
> [@split\_p\_j](#): > > Are you syaing WTC 7 didn’t look like controlled demolition to you? Are you an expert in demolitions? Is there some kind of reason I should give any credence to your opinion of what the collapse looked like? I think the facts that we know - the building was severely damaged by falling debris, was on fire, and I think its sprinkler system failed - are adequate to explain what happened. > [@split\_p\_j](#): > > My point was if the fires were so bad there, they would not have even been able to get to windows to jump in the first place. So if there is a fire in a large office building, the fire has to consume the entire floor instantly? It can’t be focused in particular areas? I think the crash knocked out most of the emergyency exits at and above the floors where the planes hit, but one of them still worked. That seems like a problem for your theory. > [@split\_p\_j](#): > > Have you even listened to the tapes? And here comes the “pull it” nonsense. Let me guess: you’re not only a demolitions expert, you used to be a NYC firefighter. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/130 "2012-07-19T18:36:34Z")
> [@split\_p\_j](#): > > Are you syaing WTC 7 didn’t look like controlled demolition to you? How many building collapses have you seen that were not controlled demolitions? ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/131 "2012-07-19T18:43:28Z")
> [@AndrewL](#): > > Nobody ever considered what the effect of having several whole floors of the building set on fire simultaneously would be on the structure. The building’s sprinkler system was designed to fight ordinary office fires. Even if the control lines and water mains had somehow survived the airplane impacts, which they didn’t, there simply wasn’t anywhere close to the capacity in water storage or flow rate to deal with a fire that size. > > The degree to which a steel truss structure like the WTC towers is vulnerable to fire really wasn’t appreciated till after 9/11. Concrete structures, or concrete/steel truss hybrid structures like One Meridian Plaza, are far more resistant to collapse from prolonged fires. Ordinary furniture easily reaches 1000°F when burned. [A steel-framed furniture store approximately the size of any one floor in the Towers](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charleston_Sofa_Super_Store_fire) caught fire completely collapsed within 50 minutes of being reported. Then you have the [Windsor Tower](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windsor_Tower_%28Madrid%29) fire, which left the top half of the structural steel hanging off the building. Fire protection for the other half of the structural steel, except for parts of two floors, had been brought up to code before the fire started. As for concrete, there’s [the Skyline Towers collapse in the '73](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyline_Towers_collapse). 26 floors pancaked into the basement. No fire, explosives, earthquake, or jet impact needed, just a mistake during construction. The supports were removed too early and destabilized the concrete, which had not completely cured. > [@split\_p\_j](#): > > I think that you are incorrect, and are trying to confuse things by adding the whole “trying to land, low on fuel and lost in fog”. Nothing I’ve read mentioned 1&2 were built to withstand these specific conditons, but let’s assume your correct. > > All that still can’t help explain WTC 7 7 was built on a site that had been originally prepped for a building with a much smaller footprint. The southern side, which faced 1 & 2, had no direct contact with the ground. There is footage of 7 being hit by debris from 1. ---
**Author:** ![split\_p\_j](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e19b73/32.png) [@split\_p\_j](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/split_p_j)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/132 "2012-07-19T18:44:17Z")
> [@AndrewL](#): > > WTC7 was a steel truss framed building that was damaged by debris from the collapsing towers, which then had major fires permitted to burn over multiple floors for many hours afterwards. It was seen to be leaning and bulging some time before it actually collapsed. Indeed, the firefighters on scene evacuated the area precisely because they know that steel truss framed buildings tend to collapse after being on fire for long periods of time. It’s largely the same case as the collapse of the towers, except it took a good deal longer to collapse - probably due to having not been nearly as badly damaged initially. What’s to explain? So, if i understand you correctly, you are basically making the case that all three buildings were just hollow tubes with an inherently weak steel truss design connecting the floors to the main supports? ---
**Author:** ![AndrewL](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@AndrewL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AndrewL)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/133 "2012-07-19T18:44:29Z")
> [@split\_p\_j](#): > > Are you syaing WTC 7 didn’t look like controlled demolition to you? Well, no. In a controlled demolition we see: [ul] [li]Months or weeks spent stripping the building and installing explosives and wiring and partially cutting key structural members[/li][li]No deformation of building structure before the explosives are set off[/li][li]Bright flashes of light, loud cracks, and many small puffs of black smoke as the explosives are set off[/li][li]Entire building falls in pieces straight down[/li][/ul] In WTC7 we saw: [ul] [li]No reports of anyone installing explosives or wiring or pre-cutting structural beams[/li][li]Building on fire for many hours before the collapse[/li][li]Building visibly leaning and bulging before the collapse[/li][li]Evidence of internal structural failure as one of the mechanical penthouses fell into the building before the global collapse began[/li][li]No sounds of explosives going off[/li][li]No flashes of light or puffs of black smoke at key structural points[/li][li]Building falls unevenly, spilling across the street and badly damaging another building[/li][/ul] So no, it didn’t look much like a controlled demolition. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/134 "2012-07-19T18:48:01Z")
> [@split\_p\_j](#): > > So, if i understand you correctly, you are basically making the case that all three buildings were just hollow tubes with an inherently weak steel truss design connecting the floors to the main supports? You understand that about as correctly as you’ve understood any of the fact-based arguments given so far. Why don’t you stick to direct quotes, because your “paraphrasing” leaves a lot to be desired. ---
**Author:** ![AndrewL](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@AndrewL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AndrewL)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/135 "2012-07-19T18:49:42Z")
> [@split\_p\_j](#): > > So, if i understand you correctly, you are basically making the case that all three buildings were just hollow tubes with an inherently weak steel truss design connecting the floors to the main supports? WTC 1 and 2 were exactly that. They were tube-in-tube structures, with large open spaces on every floor, and floor panels supported on steel trusses connected to the outer and inner tubes. This design was chosen because it was lightweight and let them have huge open offices on every floor. It is also a design which is very vulnerable to collapse from fire, as the large areas let fire spread easily and the lightweight steel trusses heat up and lose strength quickly. WTC7 had a more complex structure. It was built over a pre-existing substation, which meant it had a large structural void in the middle for the first half-dozen floors. Above that there was a cross-truss structure which joined the building columns together, which the rest of the building structure was then built on top of. The actual final collapse of WTC7 seems to have begun in this truss structure, possible triggered by the failure of a single column that supported one of the mechanical penthouses on top of the building. The impact of the penthouse and other debris hitting the truss likely triggered a progressive collapse that basically yanked the support out from everything above the truss. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/136 "2012-07-19T18:56:28Z")
> [@AndrewL](#): > > Well, no. > > In a controlled demolition we see: > > [ul] > [li]Months or weeks spent stripping the building and installing explosives and wiring and partially cutting key structural members[/li][li]No deformation of building structure before the explosives are set off[/li][li]Bright flashes of light, loud cracks, and many small puffs of black smoke as the explosives are set off[/li][li]Entire building falls in pieces straight down[/li][/ul] > > In WTC7 we saw: > > [ul] > [li]No reports of anyone installing explosives or wiring or pre-cutting structural beams[/li][li]Building on fire for many hours before the collapse[/li][li]Building visibly leaning and bulging before the collapse[/li][li]Evidence of internal structural failure as one of the mechanical penthouses fell into the building before the global collapse began[/li][li]No sounds of explosives going off[/li][li]No flashes of light or puffs of black smoke at key structural points[/li][li]Building falls unevenly, spilling across the street and badly damaging another building[/li][/ul] > > So no, it didn’t look much like a controlled demolition. 7 not only fell unevenly but went in opposite directions at nearly the same time. The southern face went south & west, into the bottom floors of the AT&T building while the northeast corner went northwest and fell on the CUNY building across the street. ---
**Author:** ![split\_p\_j](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e19b73/32.png) [@split\_p\_j](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/split_p_j)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/137 "2012-07-19T18:58:18Z")
> [@Lute Skywatcher](#): > > Ordinary furniture easily reaches 1000°F when burned. [A steel-framed furniture store approximately the size of any one floor in the Towers](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charleston_Sofa_Super_Store_fire) caught fire completely collapsed within 50 minutes of being reported. > > Then you have the [Windsor Tower](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windsor_Tower_%28Madrid%29) fire, which left the top half of the structural steel hanging off the building. Fire protection for the other half of the structural steel, except for parts of two floors, had been brought up to code before the fire started. > > As for concrete, there’s [the Skyline Towers collapse in the '73](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyline_Towers_collapse). 26 floors pancaked into the basement. No fire, explosives, earthquake, or jet impact needed, just a mistake during construction. The supports were removed too early and destabilized the concrete, which had not completely cured. > > 7 was built on a site that had been originally prepped for a building with a much smaller footprint. The southern side, which faced 1 & 2, had no direct contact with the ground. There is footage of 7 being hit by debris from 1. I am aware of all the examples you gave, and once again I think that word games are being played. I said in my OP that WTC 7 was hit by debris. It’s somewhat hard for me to get my thoughts across on a message board, but I think I was pretty clear I don’t think that buildings don’t collaspe like the way we see on 9/11 with out the help pf expolsives. 1&2 more than pancaked, those are huge parts of the buildings being blown hundreds of feet out that we see on in the pictures and videos. You may say that’s because the buildings were so tall, but Windsor Tower didn’t expel it’s parts that way when it partialy collasped, and it was pretty tall. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/138 "2012-07-19T18:59:42Z")
> [@split\_p\_j](#): > > 1&2 more than pancaked, those are huge parts of the buildings being blown hundreds of feet out that we see on in the pictures and videos. That doesn’t happen in demolitions. That’s exactly what controlled demolitions are designed _not to do_. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/139 "2012-07-19T19:03:25Z")
> [@split\_p\_j](#): > > I know what you are trying to do with this, so you might as well stop right there. > > My point was if the fires were so bad there, they would not have even been able to get to windows to jump in the first place. People do not jump from highrise fires unless they are facing certain doom, BY FIRE. Smoke won’t do it. Plenty of folks jumped from the towers. The fires were intense, but not constant. People got trapped. Others could escape. The woman you reference in the entry hole later had to jump. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099/140 "2012-07-19T19:07:05Z")
> [@split\_p\_j](#): > > Really, the response what better because of the drills? Have you even listened to the tapes? The drills had people in place. The tapes don’t have more than a moment of ‘is this real of a drill?’ ‘better’ is pretty relative since there was probably little they could do to stop the impacts, despite the bleatings of conspiracy nutters. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11/628099.md?page=8)