Merged Why WTC7 should not have collapsed

[pomeroo]

I always knew Bush would win because the Republican crooks like to fiddle the vote.

And you were, as always, completely wrong.

Now, you have made the specific claim that NIST have recreated the collapses. Please provide evidence of this. (Computer simulations are not what I nor homeland insurgency were talking about)

Neither you nor the other liar have the slightest idea of what you're trying to claim. Perhaps we should rebuild the Towers and then fly Boeing 767s into them. That would truly replicate what happened on the day of the jihadist attacks. Anything less can never satisfy the ignorant, disingenuous wishes of agenda-driven dunces.

 

[pomeroo]

Are you suggesting a high IQ is required to sit on hardfire asking a tour guide soft questions?

A high IQ is helpful in finding a tour guide capable of exposing and destroying the charlatans who lead you uncritical loons around by your noses.

 

[mchapman]

And you were, as always, completely wrong.






Neither you nor the other liar have the slightest idea of what you're trying to claim. Perhaps we should rebuild the Towers and then fly Boeing 767s into them. That would truly replicate what happened on the day of the jihadist attacks. Anything less can never satisfy the ignorant, disingenuous wishes of agenda-driven dunces.

I am not suggesting the towers be rebuilt. Some fire tests on floor assemblies without the results being massaged would suffice. Why must you pretend that the CIA attacks were perpetrated by jihadists?

 

[mchapman]

A high IQ is helpful in finding a tour guide capable of exposing and destroying the charlatans who lead you uncritical loons around by your noses.

Gee, if your IQ was even higher you might have found a scientist. Oh wait, you did. You found Frank Greening, you know, the man who panned the NIST report, the man who your tour guide had to put on ignore, the man who this forum had to ban.

 

[pomeroo]

I am not suggesting the towers be rebuilt. Some fire tests on floor assemblies without the results being massaged would suffice. Why must you pretend that the CIA attacks were perpetrated by jihadists?

Gee, I guess I do what I do because it's utterly insane and beyond stupid to pretend that the CIA, or any earthly agency, could orchestrate an operation that requires thousands of people to avoid spilling the beans forever. It is impossible that your imaginary conspiracy includes an agency that has been at loggerheads with Bush since his first days in office. Of course, that's a reality-based consideration and, as such, no concern of yours.

 

[pomeroo]

Gee, if your IQ was even higher you might have found a scientist. Oh wait, you did. You found Frank Greening, you know, the man who panned the NIST report, the man who your tour guide had to put on ignore, the man who this forum had to ban.

Frank Greening rejects the fantasist nonsense regarding explosives, as you know. He has emotional issues with the science establishment, but his conspiratorial impulses constantly war with his devotion to real science. Frank was banned for a personal issue with another member. You have, once again, no point to make.

 

[mrbaracuda]

Transmitting a TV show from your garage to 16 libertarian bores in New York

Well I enjoy the shows and I'm in Germany!

 

[mchapman]

Frank Greening rejects the fantasist nonsense regarding explosives, as you know. He has emotional issues with the science establishment, but his conspiratorial impulses constantly war with his devotion to real science. Frank was banned for a personal issue with another member. You have, once again, no point to make.

Frank Greening firmly believes in his perchlorate theory. It is a major embarassment to you because you championed him.

 

[pomeroo]

Frank Greening firmly believes in his perchlorate theory. It is a major embarassment to you because you championed him.

That's funny. I thought it was no embarrassment to me at all. Frank is a respected chemist and I'm in no position to critique his science. He was generous with his time when I first got into the debunking business, and I continue to be grateful to him.

 

[mchapman]

That's funny. I thought it was no embarrassment to me at all. Frank is a respected chemist and I'm in no position to critique his science. He was generous with his time when I first got into the debunking business, and I continue to be grateful to him.

He believes perchlorate was put on the beams in the towers. Either he is an agenda driven loon or not.

 

[pomeroo]

He believes perchlorate was put on the beams in the towers. Either he is an agenda driven loon or not.

Frank Greening believes that NIST underestimates the significance of various chemical reactions that occurred after the crashes and during the fires. He does not, unless he's recently gone mad, believe that teams of comic-book super-villains were "putting" anything on anything.

 

[jaydeehess]

oh where to jump in,,,,,,,,,,,,

I am not suggesting the towers be rebuilt. Some fire tests on floor assemblies without the results being massaged would suffice. Why must you pretend that the CIA attacks were perpetrated by jihadists?

Yes, you are indeed pretty much suggesting that the towers be rebuilt in order to then re-create the conditions that occured on 9/11.

One could test the floor assemblies in isolation (hmmm) and test the range of conditions that could have been the case for them in the towers(hmmm). There MUST be a range of conditions tested since no one can know exactly what the conditions were. That is not 'massaged' its just good science.

However, even with that being done the fantascists will then switch to the fallacy that the collapse should have been arrested by the lower floors.

Now you have to build a multi floor mock up of the towers and again test a range of impact damages, fire damages and load conditions at a cost of tens, if not hunderds, of millions of dollars. True, you don't need to completely rebuild the towers, just around 1-15 stories, a dozen times or more.

Why must you pretend that jihadists did not perpetrate these attacks?

 

[jaydeehess]

He believes perchlorate was put on the beams in the towers.

Hmm I do not recall that. Do you have a quote illustrating such a claim?

 

[pomeroo]

Hmm I do not recall that. Do you have a quote illustrating such a claim?

No, he doesn't have such a quote. He is--even I get tired of pointing this out all the time--lying again.

 

[leftysergeant]

Excuse me if I come out sounding a little bit more ignorant than I actually am, but what the hell would perchlorate do to the columns and what would lead any rational person to think that it had been there from any unsual source.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Neither you nor the other liar have the slightest idea of what you're trying to claim. Perhaps we should rebuild the Towers and then fly Boeing 767s into them. That would truly replicate what happened on the day of the jihadist attacks. Anything less can never satisfy the ignorant, disingenuous wishes of agenda-driven dunces.

Better yet, we had a full scale model already... It was World Trade Center # 2. And it showed us what would happen, 30 minutes before tower 1 fell

 

[papasmurf]

Get a load of this...

More proof that the professional community thinks that NIST is the biggest ***** joke ever to happen to engineering analysis.

http://www.ctbuh.org/Portals/0/People/WorkingGroups/Fire&Safety/CTBUH_NISTwtc7_ DraftReport.pdf

This is an article published by Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat and found on their website. It disagrees completely with the NIST report and contains rebuttals such as the following:

Several conclusions drawn in the NIST report on the contribution of structural
components in failure initiation are unexpected and have raised concerns
within the Council. These conclusions involve the role of both shear studs and
local global buckling of the floor beams in failure initiation. The Council
believes that the local connection performance was a significant part of the
global failure and would like to have seen a more explicit analysis of the
connection failure. (See also comment on Chapters 11-13.)

The NIST analysis (p. 353), shows that shear studs and the bolts holding the
primary Column 79 failed before the temperature of the steel reached 200˚C.
This implies a fundamental weakness that would be picked up by a
conventional PBD analysis. These temperatures are very low compared to a
fire protection test that assumes that steel loses strength at 550˚C.

The failure of shear studs is surprising, and has been modeled in a very
simplistic way, which may overestimate the failure of this element. Prior
studies and real fire cases have not previously identified shear stud failure as
a significant possibility Page 5

…

It is difficult to understand why the top bolts of the girder would fail at
connection to Column 79 Page 5

…

The report does not describe the detail failure mechanism of the girder
connection to Column 79. Since this was critical to the failure we would
expect to see diagrams of it, in its deflected, deformed shape immediately
prior to collapse. Page 7




I know you guys but don't like to discuss wtc7, but it really is the smoking gun and the most important issue at hand. Just though i'd rain on your parade some more...

 

[TexasJack]

I guess you missed this part. Any comments?

"The Council would like to make it clear that it sees no credibility whatsoever in the 911 ‘truth movement’ and we believe, with the vast majority of tall building professionals, that all the failures at the WTC (WTC 1, 2, 5, 6 and 7) were a direct or indirect result of the planes that were flown into the two towers."

As Chairman of the CTBUH I am well connected to most of the leading practitioners of tall building design. The Council represents organizations with well more than 100,000 employees. I do not know anyone or organization in the Council that supports the controlled demolition theory. The ASCE has an engineering membership of 120,000 and they participated in the production of the NIST report. NIST itself employs about 2,900 scientists, engineers, technicians, and support and administrative personnel and hosts about 2,600 associates.

Against this you have the ae911truth movement which has support from approximately 80 licensed structural or civil engineers, who have signed its petition. Now in proportion to the industry the level of support that the 911truth movement is tiny. However I can understand why 80 people did, because the response from government was slow and the one side videos the 911truth movement show are very compelling, if you do not review them critically.

Some people will never believe we landed on the moon and some people will never believe that the planes that crashed into the towers, eventually brought them down. From my perspective both of these statements are equally preposterous. However the 911truth movement only provides one side of the argument and any organization that does so is not interested in truth. There are numerous answers to the questions they raise and the overwhelming evidence is that CD played no part in the collapse."

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=697314&page=2

 

[A W Smith]

I know you guys but don't like to discuss wtc7, but it really is the smoking gun and the most important issue at hand. Just though i'd rain on your parade some more...

Yeah we don't like talking about building seven and the CTBUH report. we only posted two or three threads in the past week about this report. Papa smurf. Please stick your head out from the hole in your tree more often and pay attention.

The Council would like to make it clear that it sees no credibility whatsoever in
the 911 ‘truth movement’ and we believe, with the vast majority of tall building
professionals, that all the failures at the WTC (WTC 1, 2, 5, 6 and 7) were a
direct or indirect result of the planes that were flown into the two towers. We
have carefully looked at the evidence that the 911 ‘truth movement’ presents
and we cannot see any credible scientific evidence of a controlled demolition
on WTC 7 or any of the other WTC buildings. The Council considers that the
‘truth movement’ is a distraction and should not obfuscate the performance
issues which should be at the center of the debate about how best to continue​

to improve and develop fire and life safety in tall buildings.

 

[calebprime]

of course, they do say this:

The Council believes that the NIST report is a responsible attempt to find the cause of the failure, and finds that the report has investigated many of the probable causes. The Council has several technical questions about details of the modeling; but we would not expect that to change the conclusions: that the floor beams failed due to fire, which led to buckling of the internal columns resulting in global failure.