| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
 Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 11:33 am Post subject: Minor fires in WTC7 |
 |
|
Earlier we saw:
chek counters with thinly veiled suggestions that it's dust or faked, and gives a link to this closely related photo:
and an analysis suggesting it might be faked, more probably a dust cloud from the Twin Towers' collapse.
What do you notice about the two photos?
In the first (shot from across GZ), WTC1 is long gone and the dust already dispersed or settled.
Dark smoke, not dust.
A straight line up the W edge of the building in both shots, where the smoke is emerging and being blown away on the breeze. No 'dust' carelessly drifting beyond the edge of the building.
Fire damage on the W corner of the building in the region of floor 30.
Out of interest :
and
Note the firemen in the foreground, amongst the rubble. That's smoke.
In case you're still worried about "faking" and "dust", films are available at :
http://www.911myths.com/wtc7moresmoke.avi (700kb)
and
http://www.911myths.com/WTC7_Smoke.avi (5mb)
Or got to
http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_fire.html
for the whole collection.
chek et al - WTC7 had fires throughout. The photos and film show that clearly. To deny it in the face of overwhelming evidence is self-delusion. Why not just admit this simple truth about this particular area of discussion and move on to something more profitable?
_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car
Last edited by Ignatz on Tue Oct 03, 2006 12:19 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mkpdavies
Minor Poster
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 44
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 11:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Wheres the major fire?
Hardly the inferno it would take for the first steel framed building to collapse in one big go. One floor with fire, probably getting a good soaking from the spinklers.
By the time it collapsed, there is hardly any smoke at all and the building looking all but in tact.
I've had bonfires with a bit of wet wood give more smoke than that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mkpdavies
Minor Poster
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 44
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 11:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
How come none of these fell, from much WORSE fires. They didn't even start to crumble like wtc7.
I could go on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 12:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mkpdavies wrote: | How come none of these fell, from much WORSE fires. They didn't even start to crumble like wtc7.
<photos>
I could go on. |
Two words - reinforced concrete.
The irony (for you) of the Madrid fire was that it was the steel components that failed.
Keep trying.
_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mkpdavies
Minor Poster
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 44
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It still didn't crumble to the floor.
I don't need to keep trying. Ignoring the owners admission of pulling IT.
Ignoring the fact there was hardly any visible fire at all, apart from a couple of floors.
Even if I had seen it burning like hell all day, with flames jumping all over the place, I would still question how it all collapsed all in one convienient motion.
It needs a propper investigation and I haven't seen anything from you to suggest why there shouldn't be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster
Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 12:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mkpdavies wrote: | It still didn't crumble to the floor.
I don't need to keep trying. Ignoring the owners admission of pulling IT.
Ignoring the fact there was hardly any visible fire at all, apart from a couple of floors.
Even if I had seen it burning like hell all day, with flames jumping all over the place, I would still question how it all collapsed all in one convienient motion.
It needs a propper investigation and I haven't seen anything from you to suggest why there shouldn't be. |
How about this: There wasn't any crime.
Unless you can tell us what crime you believe was committed?
Insurance fraud, perhaps? And you think the insurance company would blindly pay out billions of dollars without question?
Have any of the "truthers" contacted the insurance company with the rock-solid evidence they have that Silverstein ripped them off? Don't you think they would want their money back? Or do you think they were in on it, too? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 12:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mkpdavies wrote: | It still didn't crumble to the floor.
I don't need to keep trying. Ignoring the owners admission of pulling IT.
Ignoring the fact there was hardly any visible fire at all, apart from a couple of floors.
Even if I had seen it burning like hell all day, with flames jumping all over the place, I would still question how it all collapsed all in one convienient motion.
It needs a propper investigation and I haven't seen anything from you to suggest why there shouldn't be. |
Why do you folks keep calling for a "proper investigation" when the results from the current investigation have not yet been completed. I mean, I know you have to go real bad, but try to hold it 'til we get there, 'kay?
Please, for the sake of at least sounding like you know what you're talking about when you complain about the investigation, read at least some of NIST's material.
And you may want to consider what the people who were there have to say about WTC7--the extent of the fires and damage, the leaning and creaking, the expectaion of collapse, etc.
Nicely summarized, with links, here:
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=1922651&postcount=17 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mkpdavies
Minor Poster
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 44
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 12:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
NIST have given up on trying to work out WTC7 and have passed it on. When I see a satifactory forensic report from someone, then I will stop calling.
| Quote: | How about this: There wasn't any crime.
Unless you can tell us what crime you believe was committed?
Insurance fraud, perhaps? And you think the insurance company would blindly pay out billions of dollars without question?
Have any of the "truthers" contacted the insurance company with the rock-solid evidence they have that Silverstein ripped them off? Don't you think they would want their money back? Or do you think they were in on it, too? |
As I said I am happy to ignore all allegations of crime for now, until I see a proper forensic investigation and report. You could make up a hundred possible crimes, but until we see some more evidence on why this building just fell to the ground and into little pieces, you don't have a solid starting place to go from.
Why it is taking all these years to get this basic and necessary starting block, is cause for investigation itself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster
Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mkpdavies wrote: |
As I said I am happy to ignore all allegations of crime for now, until I see a proper forensic investigation and report. You could make up a hundred possible crimes, but until we see some more evidence on why this building just fell to the ground and into little pieces, you don't have a solid starting place to go from.
|
That's just it, you can't make up crimes. There has to BE a crime. The ONLY reason you want the WTC collapse to be a deliberate act is that the idea helps affirm your shaky belief system regarding the attacks.
It is not helpful in explaining anything else.
| Quote: |
Why it is taking all these years to get this basic and necessary starting block, is cause for investigation itself. |
If you think the insurance company didn't investigate, you're living in a fantasy world. Insurance companies will look for any justification they can to avoiding paying out a claim, especially one for billions of dollars. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mkpdavies
Minor Poster
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 44
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 1:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | That's just it, you can't make up crimes. There has to BE a crime. The ONLY reason you want the WTC collapse to be a deliberate act is that the idea helps affirm your shaky belief system regarding the attacks.
It is not helpful in explaining anything else. |
Poor assumption.
There doesn't HAVE to be a crime at all. There could be, but there are other factors they maybe could come into play. Poorly designed buildings, shoddy materials used by cowboy builders, etc.
All I do know is it is not normal for any building to collapse the way WTC7 did. For that reason it needs a real forensic investigation, leaving no stone unturned, so that this never happens again.
| Quote: | | If you think the insurance company didn't investigate, you're living in a fantasy world. Insurance companies will look for any justification they can to avoiding paying out a claim, especially one for billions of dollars. |
So where is the report? Just because Bush has a brother who is a director of the insurance company that insured those buildings, doesn't mean I think there is foul play that side. That may just be another coincidence in a day of amazing coincidences.
When I see the detailed forensic report, that explains how the all parts of the building failed simulataneously, and completely, then I will be happy that all has been done to prevent this sort of thing happening in the future.
5 years on and it still can't be explained. That's poor. Very poor. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 1:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mkpdavies wrote: | | NIST have given up on trying to work out WTC7 and have passed it on. |
What on God's green earth are you on about? It's NIST's primary focus as we speak.
| Quote: | When I see a satifactory forensic report from someone, then I will stop calling.
| Quote: | How about this: There wasn't any crime.
Unless you can tell us what crime you believe was committed?
Insurance fraud, perhaps? And you think the insurance company would blindly pay out billions of dollars without question?
Have any of the "truthers" contacted the insurance company with the rock-solid evidence they have that Silverstein ripped them off? Don't you think they would want their money back? Or do you think they were in on it, too? |
As I said I am happy to ignore all allegations of crime for now, until I see a proper forensic investigation and report. You could make up a hundred possible crimes, but until we see some more evidence on why this building just fell to the ground and into little pieces, you don't have a solid starting place to go from.
Why it is taking all these years to get this basic and necessary starting block, is cause for investigation itself. |
There's no investigation necessary. The reason is plain: WTC 1 & 2 were a higher priority. If NIST rushed their investigation to appease the impatience of you lot, you would just cry foul at the inadequacy of their investigation.
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
| Quote: | 14. Why is the NIST investigation of the collapse of WTC 7 (the 47-story office building that collapsed on Sept. 11, 2001, hours after the towers) taking so long to complete? Is a controlled demolition hypothesis being considered to explain the collapse?
When NIST initiated the WTC investigation, it made a decision not to hire new staff to support the investigation. After the June 2004 progress report on the WTC investigation was issued, the NIST investigation team stopped working on WTC 7 and was assigned full-time through the fall of 2005 to complete the investigation of the WTC towers. With the release and dissemination of the report on the WTC towers in October 2005, the investigation of the WTC 7 collapse resumed. Considerable progress has been made since that time, including the review of nearly 80 boxes of new documents related to WTC 7, the development of detailed technical approaches for modeling and analyzing various collapse hypotheses, and the selection of a contractor to assist NIST staff in carrying out the analyses. It is anticipated that a draft report will be released by early 2007.
The current NIST working collapse hypothesis for WTC 7 is described in the June 2004 Progress Report on the Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster (Volume 1, page 17, as well as Appendix L), as follows:
An initial local failure occurred at the lower floors (below floor 13) of the building due to fire and/or debris-induced structural damage of a critical column (the initiating event) which supported a large-span floor bay with an area of about 2,000 square feet;
Vertical progression of the initial local failure occurred up to the east penthouse, and as the large floor bays became unable to redistribute the loads, it brought down the interior structure below the east penthouse; and
Triggered by damage due to the vertical failure, horizontal progression of the failure across the lower floors (in the region of floors 5 and 7 that were much thicker and more heavily reinforced than the rest of the floors) resulted in a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure.
This hypothesis may be supported or modified, or new hypotheses may be developed, through the course of the continuing investigation. NIST also is considering whether hypothetical blast events could have played a role in initiating the collapse. While NIST has found no evidence of a blast or controlled demolition event, NIST would like to determine the magnitude of hypothetical blast scenarios that could have led to the structural failure of one or more critical elements.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mkpdavies
Minor Poster
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 44
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | What on God's green earth are you on about? It's NIST's primary focus as we speak. |
Sorry I thought you were keeping up to date on this.
http://www.teamliberty.net/id243.html
| Quote: | | April 19, 2006 – According to the National Institute of Standards and Technology, on March 31, 2006, under solicitation number SB1341-06-Q-0186, a fixed price purchase order has been awarded by the federal government to Applied Research Associates, Inc. (ARA) of Albuquerque, New Mexico to research and provide World Trade Center Building Seven structural analysis and collapse hypotheses.[1] Specifically, the U.S. government has contracted with ARA to: |
| Quote: | | There's no investigation necessary. The reason is plain: WTC 1 & 2 were a higher priority. If NIST rushed their investigation to appease the impatience of you lot, you would just cry foul at the inadequacy of their investigation. |
That's the weakest argument I have ever seen on a forum. One of the worlds biggest crimes is commited against the American people and you say no investigation is necessary? Breathtaking.
As with all crimes, you don't clear up, until the investigators are happy they have all the samples, pictures and tests that need doing. To say WTC7 was just brushed aside and that's O.K, because of the other two, well words fail me.
NIST aren't the only people that could be utilised and if they didn't have the time to get answers, then they should have found people who did. 5 years on and still no answers, that's beyond incompetence.
They have even got others involved now, at this late late stage. Incredible and you accept that. I guess some people are easily pleased. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster
Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 1:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mkpdavies wrote: |
So where is the report? Just because Bush has a brother who is a director of the insurance company that insured those buildings, doesn't mean I think there is foul play that side. That may just be another coincidence in a day of amazing coincidences.
|
Bush's brother runs the insurance company? I wasn't aware of that. Can you tell me more? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster
Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 1:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mkpdavies wrote: |
That's the weakest argument I have ever seen on a forum. One of the worlds biggest crimes is commited against the American people and you say no investigation is necessary? Breathtaking.
|
So, the collapse of WTC7 is one of the biggest crimes committed against the American people?
Earlier, you said you weren't sure there was a crime, now you say it's a crime so heinous that they needed to put the investigation of WTC1 and 2 on hold while they investigated WTC7.
I'm not sure I understand. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mkpdavies wrote: | | Quote: | | What on God's green earth are you on about? It's NIST's primary focus as we speak. |
Sorry I thought you were keeping up to date on this.
http://www.teamliberty.net/id243.html
| Quote: | | April 19, 2006 – According to the National Institute of Standards and Technology, on March 31, 2006, under solicitation number SB1341-06-Q-0186, a fixed price purchase order has been awarded by the federal government to Applied Research Associates, Inc. (ARA) of Albuquerque, New Mexico to research and provide World Trade Center Building Seven structural analysis and collapse hypotheses.[1] Specifically, the U.S. government has contracted with ARA to: |
|
They contract out a lot of work. They're still actively leading the investigation. ARA is an addition to, not a replacement for, the NIST team.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | There's no investigation necessary. The reason is plain: WTC 1 & 2 were a higher priority. If NIST rushed their investigation to appease the impatience of you lot, you would just cry foul at the inadequacy of their investigation. |
That's the weakest argument I have ever seen on a forum. One of the worlds biggest crimes is commited against the American people and you say no investigation is necessary? Breathtaking. |
Please try to keep up. You suggested that the amount of time spent putting together the report on WTC7 needed investigating. It doesn't, because it's plain why it has taken five years.
| Quote: | As with all crimes, you don't clear up, until the investigators are happy they have all the samples, pictures and tests that need doing. To say WTC7 was just brushed aside and that's O.K, because of the other two, well words fail me.
NIST aren't the only people that could be utilised |
They aren't the only people utilized. Full list of contracts:
http://wtc.nist.gov/solicitations/
Additionally, they've solicited public input. Did you happen to contact them with your concerns?
| Quote: | | and if they didn't have the time to get answers, then they should have found people who did. 5 years on and still no answers, that's beyond incompetence. |
No answers? They provided an interim report, and solicited further input:
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/WTC%20Part%20IIC%20-%20WTC%207%20Collapse%20F inal.pdf#search=%22nist%20report%20wtc7%22
And frankly, they're not investigating to appease conspiracy theorists complaining on internet forums--they're trying diligently to get it right. That takes time. And they've told us when we can expect the report.
| Quote: | | They have even got others involved now, at this late late stage. Incredible and you accept that. I guess some people are easily pleased. |
You complain that others should be involved, and then complain that they've got others involved??? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And chek is conspicuously absent to deal with his/her previous allegations and insinuations
| chek wrote: |
So say you. Excuse me not taking that on trust.
So your contention, against all the evidence, is that the building was on fire from top to bottom?
That remains to be shown, but as I guess the reason you haven't shown that is because you can't, one is left wondering a bigger question. |
_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 4:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| chipmunk stew wrote: | | mkpdavies wrote: | | Quote: | | What on God's green earth are you on about? It's NIST's primary focus as we speak. |
Sorry I thought you were keeping up to date on this.
http://www.teamliberty.net/id243.html
| Quote: | | April 19, 2006 – According to the National Institute of Standards and Technology, on March 31, 2006, under solicitation number SB1341-06-Q-0186, a fixed price purchase order has been awarded by the federal government to Applied Research Associates, Inc. (ARA) of Albuquerque, New Mexico to research and provide World Trade Center Building Seven structural analysis and collapse hypotheses.[1] Specifically, the U.S. government has contracted with ARA to: |
|
They contract out a lot of work. They're still actively leading the investigation. ARA is an addition to, not a replacement for, the NIST team.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | There's no investigation necessary. The reason is plain: WTC 1 & 2 were a higher priority. If NIST rushed their investigation to appease the impatience of you lot, you would just cry foul at the inadequacy of their investigation. |
That's the weakest argument I have ever seen on a forum. One of the worlds biggest crimes is commited against the American people and you say no investigation is necessary? Breathtaking. |
Please try to keep up. You suggested that the amount of time spent putting together the report on WTC7 needed investigating. It doesn't, because it's plain why it has taken five years.
| Quote: | As with all crimes, you don't clear up, until the investigators are happy they have all the samples, pictures and tests that need doing. To say WTC7 was just brushed aside and that's O.K, because of the other two, well words fail me.
NIST aren't the only people that could be utilised |
They aren't the only people utilized. Full list of contracts:
http://wtc.nist.gov/solicitations/
Additionally, they've solicited public input. Did you happen to contact them with your concerns?
| Quote: | | and if they didn't have the time to get answers, then they should have found people who did. 5 years on and still no answers, that's beyond incompetence. |
No answers? They provided an interim report, and solicited further input:
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/WTC%20Part%20IIC%20-%20WTC%207%20Collapse%20F inal.pdf#search=%22nist%20report%20wtc7%22
And frankly, they're not investigating to appease conspiracy theorists complaining on internet forums--they're trying diligently to get it right. That takes time. And they've told us when we can expect the report.
| Quote: | | They have even got others involved now, at this late late stage. Incredible and you accept that. I guess some people are easily pleased. |
You complain that others should be involved, and then complain that they've got others involved??? |
About those contracts:
"Selection Process for External Experts and Contractors to Support the WTC Investigation"
http://wtc.nist.gov/solicitations/solicitation_selection_process.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
