• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Why WTC7 should not have collapsed

Status
Not open for further replies.
Homeland Insurgency said:
So according to you WTC-7 would have stood longer with only a column at each corner?
Click to expand...
Perhaps you should go research how gravity scales down.

Here's an experiment you can do: Roll a matchbox car off your kitchen counter, it will not be damaged. Scaled up to a real car, it would be like a real car going off a 200 ft. cliff... do you think the real car would be undamaged?
Of course, I suspect even this simple experiment will be beyond your understanding.
 
Homeland Insurgency said:
So according to you WTC-7 would have stood longer with only a column at each corner?
Click to expand...

It would have fallen faster because the effect of thermal expansion would have been more pronounced. You should have at least listened to Dr Sunder's video presentation before walking in here with your pants off.
 
leftysergeant said:
It would have fallen faster because the effect of thermal expansion would have been more pronounced. You should have at least listened to Dr Sunder's video presentation before walking in here with your pants off.
Click to expand...

It would have fallen faster with more or less columns?

Pants off? Keep your fantasies to yourself please.
 
Heiwa said:
Re your question ... yes.

BTW - when you removed one table leg, did global collapse follow?

What else do you worry about?
Click to expand...

Buildings and tables are two COMPLETELY different things. To compare them is not only silly, but demonstrates your complete lack of knowledge in even the most basic concepts of engineering, physics, and architecture. These types of analogies are simply a waste of time.

Its similar to the twoofers who enjoy stacking cardboard boxes, trays, and other various household items that have absolutely NO relevance to buildings or building collapses. You may now add tables with ten legs to that list.
 
Posing absurd questions without having at least heard the presentation is rather like coming out and addressing a crowd you wish to impress without first getting dressed? Your mental abilities did not enable you even to get that simile? No wonder you are a twoofer.
 
WildCat said:
Perhaps you should go research how gravity scales down.

Here's an experiment you can do: Roll a matchbox car off your kitchen counter, it will not be damaged. Scaled up to a real car, it would be like a real car going off a 200 ft. cliff... do you think the real car would be undamaged?
Of course, I suspect even this simple experiment will be beyond your understanding.
Click to expand...

I think it's you who doesn't understand if you think that is a reasonable comparison. 200 ft and 3 feet are the difference. The match car would be damaged at 200 feet and the car not very from 3 feet.

Now what is more likely? A table falling down or a steel constructed high-rise?

How many of those do you have falling down besides your wtc-7? What is it you debunkers like to claim about how many explosives or thermate would be needed to knock down a building?

Why is that?
 
Last edited:
Homeland Insurgency said:
I think it's you who doesn't understand if you think that is a reasonable comparison. 200 ft and 3 feet are difference. The match car would be damaged at 200 feet and the car not very from 3 feet.

Now what is more likely? A table falling down or a steel constructed high-rise?

How many of those do you have falling down besides your wtc-7? What is it you debunkers like to claim about how many explosives or thermate would be needed to knock down a building?

Why is that?
Click to expand...
Like I said, beyond your understanding.
 
Homeland Insurgency said:
INow what is more likely? A table falling down or a steel constructed high-rise?
Click to expand...
The steel high-rise, my table will hold up my house falling down. You fail to understand scale and structure. You are not good at this.
woodsteelfire.jpg
 
Homeland Insurgency said:
It would have fallen faster with more or less columns?

Pants off? Keep your fantasies to yourself please.
Click to expand...
Regardless of what goal posts you shift the analogy is invalid. In building structures there's a concept called the square-cube effect.

Say for example we have an umbrella shaped shelter that is 10 ft & 10 ft deep with a flat concrete roof 1 ft thick and a single center column having an area of 1ft2.

Concrete is roughly 150 Lbs/ft3, the total load on the column is about 15 kips, and the compressive stress is 15 kips/ft2
Note: 1 kip = 1,000 lbs

Take the same structure and increase the size 3 fold, overall size increases to 30 ft in each dimension; The roof slab would increase in thickness to by 3 fold as well resulting in a slab with about 2700 ft3, and a weight of 405 kips. The area of the center column would increase to 9 ft2. The column stress would be 45 kips, which is three times that of the original smaller structure. In order to effect the same compressive stress , the column area would have to triple to 27 ft2 with column dimension increasing to 5.2 ft on each side.


In other words even using the same materials in you "analogy" would result in drastically different results. The problem is compounded just by using different materials... A 1 ft3 volume of concrete can be loaded with many times it's own weight, however a slab of concrete the size of a building may only support double it's own weight.
 
Last edited:
Homeland Insurgency said:
...
What is it you debunkers like to claim about how many explosives or thermate would be needed to knock down a building? ...
Click to expand...
It does not take any explosives. A fire not fought in a building can make the entire building fall! Why are you unable to grasp reality?


Zero explosives, thermite is stupid, there would be evidence of both! You lost this round, but coming in last at JREF is like finishing an event at the Olympics. You can run away, but talk up the fact you lost here, like the insane truther Barrett, you can claim your ideas beat JREF! Lies are truth to 9/11 truth! Relax you love fantasy! Real life is not that hot, I can see why you need the fantasy of 9/11 truth!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom