Remember the criteria much match WTC7’s conditions, because I doubt the rest of us will forget.
Okay just to get the ball rolling
via wiki
photos
Now I know a lot of you are going to say
“Well wait a sec there were firefighters there…”
If you look at the pictures you will see how that obviously didn’t matter at all.
Need we remember what WTC 7 looked like ON FIRE
It isn’t. It’s completely in line with other truther bullshit.
Except it isn’t. Any engineer worth his salt knows perfectly well what happened to Building 7. You might be confusing that petition signed by a bunch of “engineers” and “architects”–who are mostly neither–with the many thousands of real engineers and architects who agree with the NIST findings.
You have failed utterly and spectacularly because you have a CT turn of mind and aren’t embarrassed to tell the world how doltish your beliefs are.
Fail right out of the gate.
The Windsor tower had a concrete frame with a steel frame structure on the upper portion.
Due to the fire the steel structure failed and collapsed. but since the main structure was concrete the remainder of the building survived.
The concrete structure people are quite proud of that detail. A detail that WTC7 lacked.
Bad start. Let me guess, the next example you give will be in Philadelphia?
How do we know you didn’t have prior knowledge about 9/11? Based on your posts here you are highly suspect.
This is for a few reasons:
- You are trying very hard to point the finger of blame at others.
- You have a lot of intimate knowledge of the events and both the good and bad illuminati.
- You know how to add physics and you had a physics professor who could have told you how to do it.
- You have an extensive knowledge of the effect of fire on steel frame buildings.
Jeez I’m flattered, well considering you had to resort to attacking my mind instead of addressing the photos of the burning Windsor Tower building that was on fire for 24 hours and didn’t lose a wink of a steel support, I’m guessing I’m pretty hot to the fire on this one (pun intended).
You do understand what I meant when I said:
You do understand that concrete is not steel, yes?
Well that’s true it was steel enforced concrete, however the portions that did collapse did not collapse all at once as with WTC 7.
Hold onto your hats folks exhibition 2 is coming up!
They weren’t part of the main structure (i.e. the major load bearer for the building so why the heck would they?
Bad start with assuredly bad follow up, maybe I should go to bed.
Hang in there we got a lot more case studies to address
Exhibition 2
Beijing Television Cultural Center
via wiki
Photos:
After fire
Now I’m going to be straight-dope from the beginning and tell you this building was not made of steel it was made of titanium zinc alloy, now you can tell me how that makes all the difference, due to temperature differences and all that good stuff…
You honestly think titanium has the same heat resistance properties of steel? You do know that that titanium allows are used in jet engine parts due to their heat resistance?
Did you not read wikipedia on Titanium Alloys?
:rolleyes:
Also, we could settle this much faster if someone has a case of a building similar to WTC 7 collapsing in demolition style due to fire alone.
You know rather than me going through every major fire on a skyscraper in recorded history.
Course there is no building similar to WTC 7 collapsing due to fire in demolition style so I guess this is going to be one long thread 
Good night. You might want to quit while you are behind.
Thank you okay so let’s move on exhibition 3.
Like I said, we can end this any time you want if you can present a case similar to WTC 7, otherwise if we want to be scientific we’ve got to be thorough.
This is your claim that things with are WTC7 are strange (albeit only to you).
But you fail to grasp that the situation with WTC was pretty much unique.
- Steel framed structure
- large amounts of burning debris falling on top of the building from collapsing WTC 1 & 2
- Failure of the sprinkler system due to water lines getting damaged by the aforementioned buildings
- Zero firefighting efforts whatsover due to loss of firefighter’s lives and rescue efforts around collapsed WTC 1 & 2.
Until you get a skyscraper fire with similar conditions, you cannot compare it to random skyscraper fires and say ‘Well that one didn’t collapse!!’’
Its not up to use to find a case where the 4 above conditions happened. You have to explain why any skyscraper should be considered a match for what happened to WTC7.
Yes, I did. It was a small conspiracy that only involved a few people. But it was too big for them to keep it a secret so the whole thing became public knowledge.
Did you ever hear the 9/11 cover-up tape?
Exhibition 3
Fire Interstate Tower (now the Aon Center)
Photos:
Now this building is very similar to WTC 7 in that it is a steel frame high rise. The fire cause of fire was suspected to be electrical though you imagine much of what was burning was “office combustibles.”
One of the main differences was the fact fire fighters were actively working to put this fire out, and the fire seemed to be spread across the entire building not on one side.
Just for sake of comparison here’s another look at the FEROCIOUS BLAZE of WTC 7
Now one more thing needs to be pointed out here which is that in the official report regarding the FIT it was stated that:
Proceed gentleman…
*Three may keep a Secret, if two of them are dead. *
Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard’s Almanac (1735).