Architects & Engineers - Solving the Mystery of WTC 7

[kh300]

When Silverstein is saying "pull it", he is referring to the building, which is an "it". People don't normally refer to other people or a group of people as "it".

You don't say:
"It" really put out that fire quickly.

No, of course you don't.

You say:

"Firefighters" really put out that fire quickly.

You also don't refer to buildings as people. So nobody would say "pull him" when referring to a building.

Hope that helps. English 101.

Lol what the fuck are you arguing? No shit hes referring to the building. Pull means get the fuck out. Hes telling everyone by referring to the building.

Besides your whole basis for the argument that wtc7 was a controlled demo is based on youtube video of someone trying to twist around the use of two words. lol. This is why after 10 years theres still not one credible piece of evidence this was a conspiracy.

[jwb]

building a fraction of the size of wtc7 being demoed

wtc7

Hey that first building didn't fall straight down or even within its own footprint so it can't have been CD!

[kh300]

Hey that first building didn't fall straight down or even within its own footprint so it can't have been CD!

The thing is listen to how loud it was. There is no video of the wtc's with any explosions,let alone the amount required to take own such large buildings compared to this small 15 story building.

[jwb]

The thing is listen to how loud it was. There is no video of the wtc's with any explosions,let alone the amount required to take own such large buildings compared to this small 15 story building.

Yeah I know that was your point of comparison but the brainiacs here will just say they used some silent thermite bullshit.

I wanna know how they expect a building that large to fall if fire did cause columns to fail as opposed to explosives causing columns to fail?

Btw, there is another video around showing wtc7 falls forward and to the left somewhat but truthers only use this video showing only the top 1/3 of the building fall down out of view because of the building in the way. There were 40 floors hidden behind that building we don't see fall.

[240 is Back]

Bullshit. It's not about logic, it's about cold hard science.

I'm a Structural Engineer who has worked on controlled demolitions.

With the state of the art tools it can be done very quickly.

Plus there are chemicals we don't even know about that the CIA can use to bring down large buildings in a short time, they do it all the time. I know this personally and anyone with a Chemical Engineering degree can confirm. I am no truther but you're wrong, very wrong.

I don't care to argue, but WTC7 was a controlled demo. Go watch 1000 controlled demo videos like i have and then watch the WTC7 fall and tell me it is not identical.

Archs and Engineers get paid to lie all the time, so take all that shit with a grain of salt. It is our job to answer the tough questions and when money is involved humans are easily swayed.

kh300 won't respond to this post

[OTHstrong]

Yeah I know that was your point of comparison but the brainiacs here will just say they used some silent thermite bullshit.

I wanna know how they expect a building that large to fall if fire did cause columns to fail as opposed to explosives causing columns to fail?
Btw, there is another video around showing wtc7 falls forward and to the left somewhat but truthers only use this video showing only the top 1/3 of the building fall down out of view because of the building in the way. There were 40 floors hidden behind that building we don't see fall.

Exactly
Wether controlled or not a building will always fall in on it's self, that argument is stupid, what do people think that a building will just tip over, ah no

[240 is Back]

Exactly
Wether controlled or not a building will always fall in on it's self, that argument is stupid, what do people think that a building will just tip over, ah no

till it do it at freefall speed?  No.

WTC7 fell in under 10 seconds.  There was no resistance from either of the central columns nor any of the floors.  They all failed simultaneously.  They all dropped at freefall speed - in fact, I think they fell a little faster when measured, which is because the explosions removed all of the air and thus air resistance.

You look at all of the events of 911, and it doesn't pass the smell test.   If Hitler pulled that shit on the german people - missing planes, buildings falling, NORAD taking the day off, etc... we'd look at it historically and laugh at the stupidity of his people.  Um, Reichtag fire.

But since "our guys" did it, we believe it.  We all shit our pants that day.  I was the strongest republican out there.  I was on the GB General board bashing the shit out of kerry/Edwards in 2004.  I drove people to vote Dubya in 2000 and 2004... made my whole family vote.

In 2005, I tried to start a fight with some idiot who implied 911 inside job.  Two months later, having done months of research, I was shocked at the very least at the refusal of our leaders to investigate something that so obviously stinks.

over time, i've spent tons of time debating it, and really, these days I don't bother.  The resources are out there.  The day stinks to shit.  once somebody gets partisan political about it, and argues against arguments they have not researched, it's time to end taht conversation.  I talk to getbiggers who laugh at things they have no idea about... shrug it off and tell them to leave their list for Santa.  It's just where they are.  live and let live.

[Disgusted]

The thing is listen to how loud it was. There is no video of the wtc's with any explosions,let alone the amount required to take own such large buildings compared to this small 15 story building.

Yes there is. There is a vid of a firefighter talking on the phone to I think his wife when there is a loud explotion. It's then that they are told to leave the area as they are going to lose the building.

[jwb]

I think you are confusing looking at websites from people with agendas such as selling their books to actual research 240.

[jwb]

Yes there is. There is a vid of a firefighter talking on the phone to I think his wife when there is a loud explotion. It's then that they are told to leave the area as they are going to lose the building.

I saw that video it was one bang probably a burning car going up. If they used normal explosives there would have been a lot more than one bang, that building had around 80 steel columns.

[Disgusted]

I think I see something odd in this picture, but maybe not.

[240 is Back]

I saw that video it was one bang probably a burning car going up. If they used normal explosives there would have been a lot more than one bang, that building had around 80 steel columns.

Did you ever see the thermite drilling from WTC 1 an2 right before the collapse?
it's at :46 of this video.

Watch the other 90 seconds of the video, and you'll learn abuot the existence of "hot spots" of molten metal under WTC 1,2, AND 7 for 6 weeks after the attacks... yes, temperature higher than jet fuel can ever attain, 6 weeks later in NYC winter.  That's evidence of explosives... nothing else can attain that temperature.  Thermite sure can.

[OTHstrong]

till it do it at freefall speed?  No.

WTC7 fell in under 10 seconds.  There was no resistance from either of the central columns nor any of the floors.  They all failed simultaneously.  They all dropped at freefall speed - in fact, I think they fell a little faster when measured, which is because the explosions removed all of the air and thus air resistance.

You look at all of the events of 911, and it doesn't pass the smell test.   If Hitler pulled that shit on the german people - missing planes, buildings falling, NORAD taking the day off, etc... we'd look at it historically and laugh at the stupidity of his people.  Um, Reichtag fire.

But since "our guys" did it, we believe it.  We all shit our pants that day.  I was the strongest republican out there.  I was on the GB General board bashing the shit out of kerry/Edwards in 2004.  I drove people to vote Dubya in 2000 and 2004... made my whole family vote.

In 2005, I tried to start a fight with some idiot who implied 911 inside job.  Two months later, having done months of research, I was shocked at the very least at the refusal of our leaders to investigate something that so obviously stinks.

over time, i've spent tons of time debating it, and really, these days I don't bother.  The resources are out there.  The day stinks to shit.  once somebody gets partisan political about it, and argues against arguments they have not researched, it's time to end taht conversation.  I talk to getbiggers who laugh at things they have no idea about... shrug it off and tell them to leave their list for Santa.  It's just where they are.  live and let live.

I really am not on either side of any argument but to mei t's it's believable that if one portion of the building is weak at the foundation the building can callapse, I don't see the problem with this, so it's a stupid argument, now falling at certain speed, that is valid argument and one that needs an explanation I suppose but not the first argument, pretty stupid one.

[jwb]

Did you ever see the thermite drilling from WTC 1 an2 right before the collapse?
it's at :46 of this video.

Watch the other 90 seconds of the video, and you'll learn abuot the existence of "hot spots" of molten metal under WTC 1,2, AND 7 for 6 weeks after the attacks... yes, temperature higher than jet fuel can ever attain, 6 weeks later in NYC winter.  That's evidence of explosives... nothing else can attain that temperature.  Thermite sure can.

Lucky they knew exactly which floor the planes would hit so they could rig the floors just below with thermite!

Those guys were great pilots!

[Fortress]

To not smell huge whiffs of bullshit surrounding the entire debacle of 9/11 is plain stupidity. Of course it didn't happen as they'd like us to believe it did. And no, I do not have the answers. But what I do have is a semi-OK-thinking brain that tells me that all the contrary evidence points to there being WAY more to the story than what is told.

I feel it was planned exactly as it occured for reasons that, while complex, are rooted in what is transpiring right now in America and, in general, the world.

The powers-that-be do what they want.

  

[240 is Back]

WTC7 was NOT in the 911 report, just as the pools of molten lava (far exceeding jet fuel) were not in the report.  Just like the insanely high stock market put options, betting that those 2 airlines would sink that tuesday morning.

Why?

Because they had nothing to do with al-Quida.  That's what the report said. 

[Nails]

Oklahoma city building after the bombing.... didn't call down until the brought the wrecking ball months later

[#1 Klaus fan]

No-one even felt the need to question the design of the building that was maybe the first major building to have a total failure. That I think is a little surprising.

[jwb]

Oklahoma city building after the bombing.... didn't call down until the brought the wrecking ball months later

That is a concrete building not steel tube. Plus the base is larger than it's height.

[jwb]

No-one even felt the need to question the design of the building that was maybe the first major building to have a total failure. That I think is a little surprising.

The largest plane when the building was designed was a Boeing 707 which is a single aisle just like the current Boeing 737. The planes that hit were twin aisle Boeing 767, a much larger and heavier plane.

The towers were designed to handle a lost in fog 707 hit it at approach speed not full speed as they were actually hit. The empire state building was once hit by a lost in fog plane btw so they did take it into account.

[Nails]

That is a concrete building not steel tube. Plus the base is larger than it's height.

so your saying Concrete is stronger then Steel

funny cus i saw all the concrete on the towers turn to dust

[#1 Klaus fan]

The largest plane when the building was designed was a Boeing 707 which is a single aisle just like the current Boeing 737. The planes that hit were twin aisle Boeing 767, a much larger and heavier plane.

The towers were designed to handle a lost in fog 707 hit it at approach speed not full speed as they were actually hit. The empire state building was once hit by a lost in fog plane btw so they did take it into account.

I was talking about the building 7. Now I realise that the towers fell before 7. Oh well, atleast they had some kind of reason to do that...

[jwb]

so your saying Concrete is stronger then Steel

funny cus i saw all the concrete on the towers turn to dust

You realize the towers were just bolted together don't you?

[jwb]

And the concrete in the towers was not reinforced but simply 100mm thick slabs poured for each floor.

[jwb]

I was talking about the building 7. Now I realise that the towers fell before 7. Oh well, atleast they had some kind of reason to do that...

The thing is neither Osama or Bush if he was in on it (wanting a war) needed any buildings to fall that day to achieve what they wanted.

The planes going into the towers and killing many many people was enough of a result to achieve their goals.

Osama had no idea the buildings would fall and he didn't care he just wanted them to get hit.