# An angle of the WTC collapse I'd never seen
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182
**Category:** Great Debates
**Created:** [July 19, 2010, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182 "2010-07-19T01:39:32Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 18
### Author:  [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 1:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/341 "2010-07-24T13:24:46Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#):
>
> You want me to explain gravity, something the planet’s best scientists still can’t grasp completely?
Gotta admit he has a good point there.
---
### Author:  [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/342 "2010-07-24T13:28:02Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#):
>
> > [@ivan\_astikov](#):
> >
> > > [@Ibanez](#):
> > >
> > > The American Society of Civil Engineers ACSE did a peer reviewed study on the collapse of the towers which the conclusion was that the towers were brought down by fire due to airplanes striking the building. Its pretty easy to find look it up.
> >
> > Did they also do a study to see what the effects of different amounts of deliberately placed explosives intended to bring about a gravity-induced collapse, might look like?
>
> Nope, because there was NO evidence of explosives found. Likewise, they did not do a study to see the what the effects of a miniature black hole on such a structure would be, and they also did not do a study to see what the effects of secret government telekinetics on such a structure would be.
You forgot to mention the metal-eating elves.
> [@Peter\_Morris](#):
>
> > [@ivan\_astikov](#):
> >
> > You want me to explain gravity, something the planet’s best scientists still can’t grasp completely?
>
> Gotta admit he has a good point there.
They may be rare, but I have my moments. 😉
---
### Author:  [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/343 "2010-07-24T13:43:46Z")
[quote=“RickJay, post:326, topic:547182”]
> [@psikeyhackr](#):
>
> > [@](#):
> >
> > The NIST tested 4 floor section in furnaces for 2 hours. THEY DID NOT FAIL! But they had fire proofing. But people claim the plane impact knocked fireproofing off so those tests don’t matter. But wouldn’t the SCIENTIFIC thing to do be to make more panels and test them without fireproofing? So why haven’t they done it?
>
> First of all, cite, please. NIST had a furnace large enough to test a 4-floor, one-acre sized steel building?
>
> They don’t have to test unprotected steel because it’s done in factories every day. I’ve seen steel bars heated to high temperatures. They become bendy. I have personally witnessed it. It’s too obvious and stupid a thing to even test. That’s one of the ways fabricators bend heavy steel.
For the record: NIST was not running the furnace tests as a model. That would not have worked properly and could have been damaging for the furnace (large furnaces are not exactly common). They were running the tests to be certain that the original steel and fireproofing standards were accurate. Before they started anything they wanted to be certain that such figures, which were done decades ago, were actually accurate. All the tests were ended before serious damage was done purposely.
Truthers saw the test and assumed it was a complete fire simulation. So they misrepresented it ever since.
---
### Author:  [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/344 "2010-07-24T13:46:19Z")
> [@Peter\_Morris](#):
>
> > [@ivan\_astikov](#):
> >
> > You want me to explain gravity, something the planet’s best scientists still can’t grasp completely?
>
> Gotta admit he has a good point there.
???
What, are you channeling the audience in [page 7](http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0055/0055_01.asp)
Not fully understanding the subatomic level of gravity does not mean we don’t have a grasp on the all the macro aspects of it. So no, he does not have a “good point”.
---
### Author:  [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/345 "2010-07-24T13:49:59Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#):
>
> I got that. Trouble is, it’s as faulty as me assuming all Derbunkers are alike.
Oh there are certainly ones who are much worse: the Space Beamers, mini-nukers, the holographic plane folks, the VicSim crowd, the Pentacon crowd, but whatever level you are at it still involves replacing faith in your distrust above the facts of science and engineering facts.
---
### Author:  [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/346 "2010-07-24T13:59:09Z")
Re - post #344
Yes, but just because you can give a name to something and explain some of the effects associated with it, that doesn’t make it “fully understood” by any stretch. Or are you going to tell us that there are no gravitational mysteries left?
> [@Mr.Miskatonic](#):
>
> > [@ivan\_astikov](#):
> >
> > I got that. Trouble is, it’s as faulty as me assuming all Derbunkers are alike.
>
> Oh there are certainly ones who are much worse: the Space Beamers, mini-nukers, the holographic plane folks, the VicSim crowd, the Pentacon crowd, but whatever level you are at it still involves replacing faith in your distrust above the facts of science and engineering facts.
So, what are the equivalent grades of Derbunkerdom? You lot too must have your categories, or are you all perfectly rational and reasonable, and have all the facts in your favour through only trusting reliable sources?
---
### Author:  [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/347 "2010-07-24T14:21:15Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#):
>
> Re - post #344
>
> Yes, but just because you can give a name to something and explain some of the effects associated with it, that doesn’t make it “fully understood” by any stretch. Or are you going to tell us that there are no gravitational mysteries left?
Nice strawman in that last sentence.
Sorry bucko, but when it comes to everyday life, engineers and scientists have got gravity’s effects down.
> [@Mr.Miskatonic](#):
>
> > [@ivan\_astikov](#):
> >
> > I got that. Trouble is, it’s as faulty as me assuming all Derbunkers are alike.
>
> Oh there are certainly ones who are much worse: the Space Beamers, mini-nukers, the holographic plane folks, the VicSim crowd, the Pentacon crowd, but whatever level you are at it still involves replacing faith in your distrust above the facts of science and engineering facts.
So, what are the equivalent grades of Derbunkerdom? You lot too must have your categories, or are you all perfectly rational and reasonable, and have all the facts in your favour through only trusting reliable sources?
[/QUOTE]
Hey, you tell me. You are trying a desperate (and lazy) tu quoque to cover for the fact that you employ magical thinking.
---
### Author:  [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/348 "2010-07-24T14:30:20Z")
> [@Mr.Miskatonic](#):
>
> What, are you channeling the audience in [page 7](http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0055/0055_01.asp)
I bow to your superior knowledge of Chick tracts.
---
### Author:  [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/349 "2010-07-24T15:49:01Z")
> [@psikeyhackr](#):
>
> Why doesn’t EVERYONE want to know the QUANTITY OF STEEL to come up with an explanation for how it could weaken in LESS THAN ONE HOUR?
On 18 June 2007, a steel-frame structure the same size as a single level of a WTC tower caught fire and collapsed in 45 minutes. Why couldn’t the same happen in the WTC? What would such a collapse do to the floor above? The floor below?
---
### Author:  [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/350 "2010-07-24T15:50:01Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#):
>
> > [@Ibanez](#):
> >
> > The American Society of Civil Engineers ACSE did a peer reviewed study on the collapse of the towers which the conclusion was that the towers were brought down by fire due to airplanes striking the building. Its pretty easy to find look it up.
>
> Did they also do a study to see what the effects of different amounts of deliberately placed explosives intended to bring about a gravity-induced collapse, might look like?
Look up what Danny Jowenko says about WTC 1 & 2 and get back to us.
---
### Author:  [@ironbender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ironbender)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/351 "2010-07-24T16:31:00Z")
To those who believe the OT without question, OK fine. Fire and damage caused by airplanes brought WTC 1&2 down. But, how do you explain WTC 7. No airplane hit that building, and photos show that there were no raging infernos. I know you will all say that the falling debris from the twin towers and the fire caused it to collapse.
However, we have seen buildings with severe structural damage caused by earthquakes, and with fires that were more intense than the ones in WTC 7. [Remember Madrid 2005?](http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/spain_fire_2005.html) None of them collapsed into their own footprint at near free fall speed, like a controlled demolition, an implosion. In fact, they fell over sideways, more or less intact, Madrid did not collapse into a small pile of rubble.
The fact is the damage to WTC 7 from the twins was confined to a corner of the building, and that being the case, should it not have, according to known physics, collapsed from that corner, asymmetrically and with most of the rest of the building still standing? Like the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building which had a bomb detonated directly in front of it and did not suffer a total collapse? By the way that building actually had to be imploded a month later to bring it down.
I see that the OT believers are trying an old tactic to shut down debate. Talking about holograms, no plane hitting the pentagon and switched airplanes, aliens. That is just an attempt to label anyone who doubts the OT as crazy, and their opinions too.
There are serious questions about 911 that have not been but need to be answered, and the more I really think about those questions, the harder it is for me to believe the OT. and i am not alone.
So I ask, how do you explain WTC 7?
---
### Author:  [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/352 "2010-07-24T16:46:06Z")
> [@ironbender](#):
>
> So I ask, how do you explain WTC 7?
> **[7 World Trade Center](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#Collapse)**
>
> 7 World Trade Center (7 WTC, WTC-7, or Tower 7) is an office building constructed as part of the new World Trade Center in Lower Manhattan, New York City. The tower is located on a city block bounded by Greenwich, Vesey, Washington, and Barclay Streets on the east, south, west, and north, respectively. 7 World Trade Center was developed by Larry Silverstein, who holds a ground lease for the site from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, and designed by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill.
> Th...
> [@](#):
>
> On August 21, 2008, NIST released its draft report on the causes of the collapse of 7 World Trade Center, beginning a period for public comments. In its investigation, NIST utilized ANSYS to model events leading up to collapse initiation and LS-DYNA models to simulate the global response to the initiating events. NIST determined that diesel fuel did not play an important role, nor did the structural damage from the collapse of the twin towers. But the lack of water to fight the fire was an important factor. The fires burned out of control during the afternoon, including on floor 13, where a critical interior column buckled. With the buckling of that column, adjacent columns also failed along with the floor structure above. This triggered a vertical progression of floor failures to the roof. The collapse then progressed east-to-west across the structure, and ultimately the entire structure collapsed. The fires, fueled by office contents, along with the lack of water, were the key reasons for the collapse.
---
### Author:  [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/353 "2010-07-24T16:50:47Z")
The collapse did not “progress from east-to-west” on the footage that everyone is familiar with. Do you have other footage that shows it fell in an asymmetrical manner?
---
### Author:  [@Indistinguishable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Indistinguishable)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/354 "2010-07-24T16:50:59Z")
Even before WTC 7 collapsed, there were noted concerns that the fires within would cause it to collapse. It wasn’t some great surprise, as a sudden bombing of that inconsequential building would have been.
---
### Author:  [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/355 "2010-07-24T16:51:50Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#):
>
> The collapse did not “progress from east-to-west” on the footage that everyone is familiar with. Do you have other footage that shows it fell in an asymmetrical manner?
Do you have footage that shows it didn’t?
EDIT:
Actually, do you have ACTUAL footage of ANY of the buildings collapsing? I’m talking about real, unaltered footage. Not the CGI that everyone has seen. Without that, you have no proof that the buildings collapsed at all.
.
---
### Author:  [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/356 "2010-07-24T16:56:40Z")
Oh, and in relation to that famous footage, at which end was this vulnerable interior column? Would it be to the left or the right of WTC7 as it was shown on tv?
---
### Author:  [@Larry\_Borgia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Borgia)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/357 "2010-07-24T16:58:55Z")
I’m not an architect or an engineer, so I can’t comment on the technical details of the WTC7 collapse. However I’ve always wondered why it was so important to the secret masters that it did. Their goal was to create a false flag operation which would enrage the American public and allow them to push through the Iraq war and erode civil liberties, right? So how did the building 7 collapse further that? We already saw the towers collapse, with thousands of people dead. I think the public was as engraged as they were going to get.
Arguing the technical details cedes too much ground to the CT’s. The whole thing is absurd on its face.
---
### Author:  [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/358 "2010-07-24T17:01:35Z")
> [@Indistinguishable](#):
>
> Even before WTC 7 collapsed, there were noted concerns that the fires within would cause it to collapse. It wasn’t some great surprise, as a sudden bombing of that inconsequential building would have been.
The two tallest buildings in NY had just fallen down; of course there were concerns it might fall down too.
What I’d like you to try and imagine tho’ is, if the other 2 towers hadn’t been attacked, and a bomb of some kind had caused the damage and resulting fires, would a reasonable person have expected that building to come down the way it did?
---
### Author:  [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/359 "2010-07-24T17:07:36Z")
> [@ironbender](#):
>
> To those who believe the OT without question, OK fine. Fire and damage caused by airplanes brought WTC 1&2 down. But, how do you explain WTC 7. No airplane hit that building, and photos show that there were no raging infernos.
_cough_BULLSHIT_cough_
> **[911myths](https://web.archive.org/web/20191216033221/http://www.911myths.com/index.php?title=Main_Page)**
> [@](#):
>
> I know you will all say that the falling debris from the twin towers and the fire caused it to collapse.
>
> However, we have seen buildings with severe structural damage caused by earthquakes, and with fires that were more intense than the ones in WTC 7. [Remember Madrid 2005?](http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/spain_fire_2005.html) None of them collapsed into their own footprint at near free fall speed, like a controlled demolition, an implosion. In fact, they fell over sideways, more or less intact, Madrid did not collapse into a small pile of rubble.
WTC did not fall into its own footprint, it did a lot of damage to nearby buildings and blocked off streets, inclding 30 West Broadway and the nearby Verizon building.
As for Madrid, it was a concrete core building with some attached steel framing that did collapse.
> [@](#):
>
> The fact is the damage to WTC 7 from the twins was confined to a corner of the building, and that being the case, should it not have, according to known physics, collapsed from that corner, asymmetrically and with most of the rest of the building still standing? Like the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building which had a bomb detonated directly in front of it and did not suffer a total collapse? By the way that building actually had to be imploded a month later to bring it down.
You are comparing two completely different buildings.
> [@](#):
>
> I see that the OT believers are trying an old tactic to shut down debate. Talking about holograms, no plane hitting the pentagon and switched airplanes, aliens. That is just an attempt to label anyone who doubts the OT as crazy, and their opinions too.
>
> There are serious questions about 911 that have not been but need to be answered, and the more I really think about those questions, the harder it is for me to believe the OT. and i am not alone.
>
> So I ask, how do you explain WTC 7?
Unfought raging fires that conspiracy theorists pretend did not exist.
---
### Author:  [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)
#### Post date: [July 24, 2010, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/360 "2010-07-24T17:08:36Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#):
>
> They are not even remotely the same
May as well be - both denying vast amounts of physical evidence, claiming conspiracies and political bias when people reject their theories, yet it’s surprisingly seductive to a good-sized segment of the population who will never give it up and can never conceive of giving it up.
I can imagine evidence that might convince me of young-earth creationism, and possibly even evidence that might convince of U.S. Government complicity in the attack. Can you conceive of evidence that would convince you the planes were the sole cause of the collapse? If you can, we can probably find it for you. If you can’t, you’re a true believer, and the effort is pointless. Even this analysis I’m writing is a waste of ti
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182.md?page=17)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182.md?page=19)