# 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:** 29
### Author:  [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/561 "2010-07-27T18:25:19Z")
> [@Lute Skywatcher](#):
>
> > [@begbert2](#):
> >
> > JAQer
>
> Something tells me if this were the Pit, you’d have appended that with a certain three-letter word instead.
If you mean “off”, then you’re wrong - I suss that “JAQing off” is an acceptable phrase in GD, as it refers to the argumentive tactic of asking endless questions, not taking answers for an answer, and then pretending that there’s something meaningful about all the ‘unanswered questions’. (The manner in which the activity satisfies nobody but the questioner is another layer of meaning behind the term.) Regardless, the reason I did not say “JAQing-offers” was merely because it sounded dumb, not becuase I thought it was unacceptable.
If you meant “ass”, then you’re simply wrong - that’s not the term.
And now, back to your regularly scheduled question-fest.
> [@ivan\_astikov](#):
>
> As I’ve already mentioned, it is no surprise that there was some expectation of the building to collapse, when two of the tallest buildings in the country had just fallen down in less than 40 secs. Had those two buildings not been involved and this was an inferno caused by a bomb, nobody would have expected it to come down the way it did.
The fact that the twin towers were tall and had fallen fast had nothing to do with expectations that WTC7 would fall, aside from the tangential fact a piece of rubble from one of them had damaged the building and set it on fire. After all, there were many other buildings around and, despite the fact that the towers were still fallen and had still fallen fast nobody expected any of _them_ to spontaneously collapse.
And if the two buildings had not been involved and this had been an inferno caused by a bomb the fire department would have had the resources and water pressure to put it out, _duh_. Unless you’re saying that the fire would still go unfought, but the fire deparment would be saying, “Sure, the building is a fireball, but it will stand, because it won’t fall because buildings only actually collapse if taller buildings collapse fast first.” Is that what you’re saying?
---
### Author:  [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/562 "2010-07-27T18:26:58Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#):
>
> As I’ve already mentioned, it is no surprise that there was some expectation of the building to collapse, when two of the tallest buildings in the country had just fallen down in less than 40 secs. Had those two buildings not been involved and this was an inferno caused by a bomb, nobody would have expected it to come down the way it did.
I’m not confident anyone, including you, knows what this means.
---
### Author:  [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/563 "2010-07-27T18:58:47Z")
I’ll type a little slower so the mentally-challenged can follow along.
If the conditions involved in the collapse of WTC7 occurred without anything having happened to towers 1 and 2… I mean all the conditions: a big chunk taken out of part of the building, raging fires, and no water to fight them with, what would have caused any firefighters on the scene to believe it was going to come down so dramatically? It’s obvious normal firefighters on the ground didn’t think it was going to come tumbling down, otherwise they wouldn’t have needed to be told to clear the area.
---
### Author:  [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/564 "2010-07-27T19:05:34Z")
Saying that though, the reality that 2 buildings had already fallen killing many members of the emergency services, everyone had been evacuated from WTC7 anyway, and there was no water to fight the fires with, makes me wonder why there were firefighters still hanging around near there?
---
### Author:  [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/565 "2010-07-27T19:07:59Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#):
>
> As I’ve already mentioned, it is no surprise that there was some expectation of the building to collapse, when two of the tallest buildings in the country had just fallen down in less than 40 secs. Had those two buildings not been involved and this was an inferno caused by a bomb, nobody would have expected it to come down the way it did.
_The building was visibly warping_. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that this says something pretty bad about the integrity of the building.
---
### Author:  [@Indistinguishable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Indistinguishable)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/566 "2010-07-27T19:08:03Z")
No doubt, if there weren’t any firefighters on the scene, that would be evidence of secret knowledge of shady plans to you as well.
ETA: Obviously not in response to **Grumman**
---
### Author:  [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/567 "2010-07-27T19:13:08Z")
> [@Grumman](#):
>
> > [@ivan\_astikov](#):
> >
> > As I’ve already mentioned, it is no surprise that there was some expectation of the building to collapse, when two of the tallest buildings in the country had just fallen down in less than 40 secs. Had those two buildings not been involved and this was an inferno caused by a bomb, nobody would have expected it to come down the way it did.
>
> _The building was visibly warping_. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that this says something pretty bad about the integrity of the building.
Show me any signs of that, from the angle that everyone is familiar with. One thing I have noticed on that clip is a line of windows extending down several floors, all exploding outwards at the same time. Now, I can understand compressed air squibs appearing below the line of collapse, but I find it a lot more difficult to believe that a collapse from the other end would only push out those windows.
Here ya go, a little linkypoo… [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvUiMwCXf08](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvUiMwCXf08)
Go on, let’s hear your comprehensive explanations.
---
### Author:  [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/568 "2010-07-27T19:16:34Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#):
>
> I’ll type a little slower so the mentally-challenged can follow along.
[Moderating]
There will be warnings if there are any more comments like this.
[/Moderating]
---
### Author:  [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/569 "2010-07-27T19:16:52Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#):
>
> … what would have caused any firefighters on the scene to believe it was going to come down so dramatically?
The answer is in **CurtC** ’s post above. The building was visibly bulging, suggesting that its structural integrity had been serious compromised.
> [@](#):
>
> _It’s obvious normal firefighters on the ground didn’t think it was going to come tumbling down, otherwise they wouldn’t have needed to be told to clear the area._
Unless the jeopardy is obvious and unambiguous, firefighters on the ground rely on their superiors to make the call on how hopeless or dangerous a situation is. They don’t each decide on their own to pull back – they take orders from the higher-ups, who, presumably because they can see the big picture and have more experience, are in a better position to judge the situation. Remember, it took WTC 7 several hours to fall down after the firefighters were pulled out. It wasn’t a case of “Oh shit, it’s falling! Run!” but of “The chief thinks this building is a lost cause and may collapse soon. Everyone out.”
---
### Author:  [@Who\_me\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Who_me_1)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/570 "2010-07-27T19:17:07Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#):
>
> I’ll type a little slower so the mentally-challenged can follow along.
>
> If the conditions involved in the collapse of WTC7 occurred without anything having happened to towers 1 and 2… I mean all the conditions: a big chunk taken out of part of the building, raging fires, and no water to fight them with, what would have caused any firefighters on the scene to believe it was going to come down so dramatically? It’s obvious normal firefighters on the ground didn’t think it was going to come tumbling down, otherwise they wouldn’t have needed to be told to clear the area.
Oops… sorry. Made with the snark a little. Gone now… as far as I can get it to go.
---
### Author:  [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/571 "2010-07-27T19:21:00Z")
Notice that it comes down in an almost perfectly straight line until it reaches the level of the white building on the left. Does that seem normal for a building asymmetrically damaged by fire and slight structural damage?
---
### Author:  [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/572 "2010-07-27T19:23:30Z")
> [@Marley23](#):
>
> > [@ivan\_astikov](#):
> >
> > I’ll type a little slower so the mentally-challenged can follow along.
>
> [Moderating]
> There will be warnings if there are any more comments like this.
> [/Moderating]
Okay, warning recognised. I hope you are also going to apply that ruling to anyone who continues to refer to me as a “truther”, with all that description implies?
ps. I don’t mind anybody calling me a “Questioner”.
---
### Author:  [@Indistinguishable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Indistinguishable)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/573 "2010-07-27T19:26:27Z")
What does “truther” imply?
---
### Author:  [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/574 "2010-07-27T19:26:29Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#):
>
> I hope you are also going to apply that ruling to anyone who continues to refer to me as a “truther”, with all that description implies?
>
> ps. I don’t mind anybody calling me a “Questioner”.
Absolutely not. “Truther” is not equivalent to “mentally challenged” as an insult.
---
### Author:  [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/575 "2010-07-27T19:27:19Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#):
>
> Notice that it comes down in almost perfectly straight line until it reaches the level of the white building on the left. Does that seem normal for a building asymmetrically damaged by fire and slight structural damage?
I think it would be a total waste of time to try explaining what would or would not be normal in that situation because it is quite clear that your version of “normal” doesn’t correspond with that of most others here.
---
### Author:  [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/576 "2010-07-27T19:37:40Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#):
>
> It’s obvious normal firefighters on the ground didn’t think it was going to come tumbling down, otherwise they wouldn’t have needed to be told to clear the area.
> [@ivan\_astikov](#):
>
> Saying that though, the reality that 2 buildings had already fallen killing many members of the emergency services, everyone had been evacuated from WTC7 anyway, and there was no water to fight the fires with, makes me wonder why there were firefighters still hanging around near there?
What’s “obvious” to your trooth-addled mind is not obvious to some of the bravest men in the world. My brother is firefighter and one of my biggest fears is that he’ll rush into a building one day **knowing** it’s going to come down, with the slightest hope of getting one last person out. I know him, and I know he’d do it. But of course you people always come around to blaming rescue because none of your insane fantasies make a lick of sense unless they were in on it. It’s beyond disgusting.
---
### Author:  [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/577 "2010-07-27T19:42:03Z")
> [@Marley23](#):
>
> > [@ivan\_astikov](#):
> >
> > I hope you are also going to apply that ruling to anyone who continues to refer to me as a “truther”, with all that description implies?
> >
> > ps. I don’t mind anybody calling me a “Questioner”.
>
> Absolutely not. “Truther” is not equivalent to “mentally challenged” as an insult.
Actually, the common understanding of it is someone who is a complete crank, has no grasp of logical thinking, cannot distinguish between truth and lie, hates the USA, is a traitor to all those who died that day, and supports those who want to blow up civilians for no good reason.
Kinda makes a “mentally-challenged” aimed at nobody in particular look a little bit like a compliment.
YMMV. Whatever!
---
### Author:  [@Indistinguishable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Indistinguishable)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/578 "2010-07-27T19:45:14Z")
That’s not the common understanding of the term “truther”; that’s just a common understanding of the position you are taking. It has nothing to do with what one calls such a position or its advocates.
---
### Author:  [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/579 "2010-07-27T19:48:14Z")
> [@Indistinguishable](#):
>
> That’s not the common understanding of the term “truther”; that’s just a common understanding of people who take the position you are taking. It has nothing to do with what one calls them.
I suppose you’ll be telling me it’s a backhanded compliment next? :dubious:
Anyway, I await your common understanding of the term eagerly.
---
### Author:  [@sparky\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sparky_1)
#### Post date: [July 27, 2010, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182/580 "2010-07-27T19:50:42Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#):
>
> > [@Marley23](#):
> >
> > > [@ivan\_astikov](#):
> > >
> > > I hope you are also going to apply that ruling to anyone who continues to refer to me as a “truther”, with all that description implies?
> > >
> > > ps. I don’t mind anybody calling me a “Questioner”.
> >
> > Absolutely not. “Truther” is not equivalent to “mentally challenged” as an insult.
>
> Actually, the common understanding of it is someone who is a complete crank, has no grasp of logical thinking, cannot distinguish between truth and lie, hates the USA, is a traitor to all those who died that day, and supports those who want to blow up civilians for no good reason.
>
> Kinda makes a “mentally-challenged” aimed at nobody in particular look a little bit like a compliment.
>
> YMMV. Whatever!
Wow. I’m sorry but the majority of questions in this thread fit nicely into your above description.
Someone using logical thinking does not blindly grasp at just any tantalizing possibility but instead uses logic to filter out the preposterous.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182.md?page=28)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-angle-of-the-wtc-collapse-id-never-seen/547182.md?page=30)