Is the 9/11 Forum Dying?

a reply to: GenRadek

Fires throughout the structure for five hours

and even with the access to 50,000 pics and 150 hours of video, 2005 NIST CAN NOT SEE the fire at the windows WHERE THEY MEASURED the global UNIFIED acceleration EQUAL to g......a point on the facade that is ATTACHED to the perimeter vertical support where there is NO FIRE that is sorely NEEDED to REMOVE them to ALLOW what we all see to occur. The facade is a cosmetic application, it has NO LOAD BEARING capabilities, it can't support itself let alone anything else.....
WHAT removed structural resistance to ZERO?????..fire we can't see creating a BRAND NEW NEVER BEFORE SEN physics phenomenon, as IS the OFFICIAL CLAIMS by the 2008 NIST hypothesis crew.....

"the phenomenon that we saw on 9/11 that brought this particular building down was really thermal expansion, which occurs at lower temperatures."

2008 NIST webcast WTC7 tech briefing, Shyam Sunder reporting


go watch the video and follow along with the accompanying PDF transcription....that quote is on page 34.

Completely different from a rigid concrete and brick structure.

LMAO!!!!!!!!...yea, this was STEEL....much STRONGER and more resilient...that is why steel framed buildings are SO popular....continuous load bearing vertical support with ATTACHED long span trusses....you know, the REASON these collapse are NOT mimicked anywhere throughout history of mankind.....fire CAN NOT do this.

It took over 18 seconds to collapse. I wouldnt call that a couple seconds.....how exactly is the science corrupted or illogical? Where exactly can you show me this in the NIST reports? Please I would love to see!

WRONG AGAIN Field Marshal Glen...all we have to do is READ THE REPORT to see you are a LIAR!!!!

NCSTAR 1A 3.6] "This free fall drop continues for approximately 8 stories, the distance traveled between t=1.75s and t=4.0s...constant, downward acceleration during this time interval. This acceleration was *9.8m/s^2*, equivalent to the acceleration of gravity."

NICSTAR 1A 4.3.4] Global Collapse..."The entire building above the buckled column region moved downward in a single unit, as observed, completing the global collapse"

NCSTAR1A p.39/130
"the damage from the debris from WTC 1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of WTC 7."

as soon as the kink formed at 1.74 seconds....free fall acceleration occurred @ 1.75 seconds to 4.0 seconds, then 2.5 seconds later, it's ALL DONE!

a 6.5 second collapse with 1/3 being in free fall.


18 seconds huh!!!

hey, here is ANOTHER QUOTE from Shyam Sunder from that tech briefing as they TRIED to thwart off comments about free fall....this quote is on page 16 of the transcript...

"free fall acceleration can ONLY occur when there is NO STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS BELOW IT"

seems Shyam is quoting ALL taught science when he makes that comment, in fact, that is the ONLY time he quotes correctly...


The NIST WTC7 report Fig 3-15 shows the graph with the regression line yielding acceleration of 32.196ft/s^2. SEE the time interval between 1.75 and 4 is 2.25 sec. the interval where WTC7 does achieve a period of free-fall ACCELERATION.

what does SCIENCE say about the 2.3 second interval, "Indistinguishable from FREEFALL".... NONE of the gravitational energy was available to destroy the supporting structures, ALL converted to MOTION!

meaning, any bending, crushing, breaking connections, REMOVAL of structural RESISTANCE, BELOW the mass ACCELERATING, is occurring WITHOUT the assistance of energy from the mass accelerating. Zero resistance.

now where else ON EARTH do we see those SAME numbers seen in that STEEL FRAMED BUILDING @ 9.8m/s^2 ????
We can open ANY science/physics text...."rate of acceleration seen by ALL mass REGARDLESS of weight toward the earth, at sea level, *~**WITHIN a VACUUM**~* is *9.8m/s^2*.

hmm.....the SAME numbers we see under 'CONTROLLED conditions, WE SEE occurring globally and UNIFIED in a 47 story steel frame @ 1.75 SECONDS, when kink forms, to 4.0s of the collapse....2.5 seconds later, it's done....6.5 second building collapse from FIRE we can't really see from the windows.

NCSTAR1A-3.2]"It is likely that much of the burning took place beyond the views of the windows"

See, this is a problem with many that believe something sinister

then PROVE the official claim that a NEW physics phenomenon called LOW TEMP thermal expansion COMPLETELY removed the required structural RESISTANCE...as it MUST do to accelerate EQUAL to g as a 'SINGLE UNIT!!!!!...moving as one.

"the phenomenon that we saw on 9/11 that brought this particular building down was really thermal expansion, which occurs at lower temperatures."

lol again....I think this response from you is appropriate at this time....

Rather than debate the facts, create a blanket false assertion that everyone is in on it, people were paid off, corrupt, and in this way avoid any debate because one cannot back up their erroneous stance. In layman terms: Since you cannot argue against the facts, claim that everyone is wrong and corrupt, therefore anything they say is wrong and lies, and this way you dont have to make any sort of argument to counter. Way to go!

tell me what it means to CLAIM new science then REFUSE to prove it THROUGH SCIENCE???????

as the 2008 NIST refuses to PROVE/peer review/verify/validate this NEW phenomenon called LOW TEMP thermal expansion that REMOVED, ALL BEFORE 1.74 seconds....

105 vertical feet of LOAD BEARING continuous vertical support columns....
8 floors of truss assemblies with carrier beams...
lateral, cross, and diagonal bracing throughout...
tens of thousands of bolts and welds...
office contents...
utilities...

...cause it's LIE!!!!!!!

enter a Presidential Executive Order to BLANKED ALL involved in the fiasco that is 9-11

Executive Order Archive

"NIST is withholding 68,246 files. These records are currently exempt from disclosure. All input and results files of the ANSYS 16 story and the LS-DYNA 47-story global collapse model that were used to simulate sequential structural failures leading to collapse."

a reply to: GenRadek

The reason why it didnt just tip over was because it was not a solid rigid structure,

LMAO again.......


are you kidding me........what was it???????......Jenga??????

pleas show me that there can be symmetry through a complete collapse when there is resistance in the system.

a reply to: hgfbob

pleas show me that there can be symmetry through a complete collapse when there is resistance in the system.

Play Jenga once.

a reply to: samkent

Play Jenga once.

jenga has no interconnected members and redundant overlapping applications to form a single unit, all buildings do ...build as steel framed building once , and tell me HOW they are alike......

and I don't see ANY Jenga turning to dust as it falls either.....you know....like objects interacting and all!!!...lmao...you guys crack me up

uhm...is this what you...'people' ....do?

take turns leaving asinine replies....

a reply to: hgfbob

Wow so many erroneous assumptions.

Lets start at the beginning:
It has been confirmed by numerous firefighters and observers of large fires out of control inside WTC7 prior to collapse. In some areas the fires burned through to the other side (North Side) of the structure. This is what we could "see". The South face of the building showed heavy dense smoke that was coming off numerous floors. This was proof of the fires that had been burning continuously for 5 hours without one drop of water. Oh yes this is what the South Face of the WTC looked like:
Yeah no fire there! Just smoke................

as you can see plenty of smoke was pouring from the south face of the building. That means that there's fire in that there building.

And now let us go to the people on the ground that saw what was going on at WTC7:
sites.google.com...

According to these fine gentleman this building was burning from snout to tail. so there goes your false accusations that I am lying about the severity of the fires at WTC7.

Now onto the collapse. You should really read into what "thermal expansion" means and what happens to steel when heated. Sure, steel is a great building material for skyscrapers and many many structures. However, if it is so grand, so tough, so unbreakable........... why is it so important to fireproof it?????? Answer, because steel can heat up rapidly and expand, forcing connections to fail, damaging the structure and possible collapse. This is the part where I tell you to go find a firefighting manual and read up on steel structures in major fires. I can recommend a couple. Steel buildings are just as susceptible to fires as wood buildings are, without proper fireproofing. Now, here is where I am sure you have no idea what constitutes proper fireproofing. Fireproofing is usually sprayed onto the steel structures. They must have a uniform application done where there are no thin segments applied. Also, this type of fireproofing is susceptible to impact damage, age, and failure. Now the kicker. Fireproofing is rated at a standard of 2 - 3 hours of fire exposure. Fire safety engineers believe that this is enough time for firefighters to get a handle on the fires and put them out with the help of sprinklers and such. WTC7 had no such luxury. It burned for up to 5 hours. Fireproofing that was damaged in the collapse impact, or flaked off due to age, lack of maintenance, etc, was then exposed to flames and heat for a longer time. This caused the steel to heat up and expand. Again, if you have no idea or you must ridicule what thermal expansion is, then please stop talking and leave. I know what it is, NIST knows what it is, firefighters know what it is. if you want evidence of what fire can do to steel, I suggest reading up on the McCormick Place fire of 1967, where the heavy steel truss roof collapsed within one hour of fire ignition. Let me repeat that slowly for you so you can understand it better and not miss it: T-h-e h-e-a-v-y s-t-e-e-l t-r-u-s-s-e-d r-o-o-f c-o-l-l-a-p-s-e-d w-i-t-h-i-n o-n-e h-o-u-r o-f i-g-n-i-t-i-o-n

Now you can do some reading here where it concerns steel structures and large fires.
www.wpi.edu...

But I know you won't bother to since everyone and their grandmother must be in on it.

As to the collapse. The collapse of WTC7 began when the penthouse began its collapse. That meant the structure was already collapsing INTERNALLY for a few moments, spilling its guts out, before the exterior shell collapsed later. 18 seconds from movement of the penthouse to total collapse to the ground. It fell towards the south because it was already leaning in that direction. The fires were deforming the structure throughout the day. The tilt was noticed by many. They even put a surveyor transit on it, to watch for any sudden movement. By the way, this can all be found with a few clicks on the internet. But I know you will ignore this too or find a way to poo-poo it away.

As for why it appeared to freefall for a second was more than likely due to the damage structure giving minute resistance, due to failing earlier or what have you. This is only speculation because we didnt have cameras inside.

You keep harping on this second of freefall as if it unravels everything. But it doesnt. You have the burden of proof to show there was funny business around WTC7. However, no detonations were heard prior to collapse. NONE. NADA. ZIP. In fact here is what NIST said about it too:

NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.
In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses. According to calculations by the investigation team, the smallest blast capable of failing the building's critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 decibels (dB) to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile, if unobstructed by surrounding buildings. This sound level is consistent with a gunshot blast, standing next to a jet plane engine, and more than 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert.

Hell you can do the calculations yourself. Now show me evidence of someone hearing this happen prior to collapse. I'll betya wont.


Also, thermal expansion is nothing new. It is just "new and magical" to uninformed newbies that are woefully under educated in these areas. Google "thermal expansion of steel". That is a good start.

a reply to: hgfbob

Resistance was overcome by gravity. There was resistance because it did not collapse at total freefall speed.

FYI, the building did tilt towards the south as it fell. Why it didnt tilt over in one piece is due to the steel skeleton structure. I thought this was pretty obvious. But I guess not.

Oh yes, by the way, here is what NIST has to say about the "free fall".

11. In a video, it appears that WTC 7 is descending in free fall, something that would not occur in the structural collapse that you describe. How can NIST ignore basic laws of physics?
In the draft WTC 7 report (released Aug. 21, 2008; available at www.nist.gov...), NIST stated that the north face of the building descended 18 stories (the portion of the collapse visible in the video) in 5.4 seconds, based on video analysis of the building collapse. This time period is 40 percent longer than the 3.9 seconds this process would have taken if the north face of the building had descended solely under free fall conditions. During the public comment period on the draft report, NIST was asked to confirm this time difference and define the reasons for it in greater detail.
To further clarify the descent of the north face, NIST recorded the downward displacement of a point near the center of the roofline from first movement until the north face was no longer visible in the video. Numerical analyses were conducted to calculate the velocity and acceleration of the roofline point from the time-dependent displacement data. The instant at which vertical motion of the roofline first occurred was determined by tracking the numerical value of the brightness of a pixel (a single element in the video image) at the roofline. This pixel became brighter as the roofline began to descend because the color of the pixel started to change from that of the building façade to the lighter color of the sky.
The approach taken by NIST is summarized in NIST NCSTAR Report 1A, Section 3.6, and detailed in NIST NCSTAR Report 1-9, Section 12.5.3.
The analyses of the video (both the estimation of the instant the roofline began to descend and the calculated velocity and acceleration of a point on the roofline) revealed three distinct stages characterizing the 5.4 seconds of collapse:
Stage 1 (0 to 1.75 seconds): acceleration less than that of gravity (i.e., slower than free fall).
Stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): gravitational acceleration (free fall)
Stage 3 (4.0 to 5.4 seconds): decreased acceleration, again less than that of gravity
This analysis showed that the 40 percent longer descent time—compared to the 3.9 second free fall time—was due primarily to Stage 1, which corresponded to the buckling of the exterior columns in the lower stories of the north face. During Stage 2, the north face descended essentially in free fall, indicating negligible support from the structure below. This is consistent with the structural analysis model, which showed the exterior columns buckling and losing their capacity to support the loads from the structure above. In Stage 3, the acceleration decreased as the upper portion of the north face encountered increased resistance from the collapsed structure and the debris pile below.

www.nist.gov...

I find it funny that you cannot do one iota of actual research, and instead prefer to demand answers and then ignore them when they do not fit your preconceived notions.

a reply to: GenRadek

Resistance was overcome by gravity.

no, SOMETHING REMOVED resistance to ALLOW gravity to work...........and YOU nor
anyone else has EVIDENCE they did from fires present OR impact damage.....the REASON WE ARE HERE!

round and round we go huh.....

lol..and there ya go POINTING to a FAQ that was written AFTER The scientific investigation...the 2005 NIST that found NO SCIENTIFIC reason for collapse x3.

they can write WHAT EVER THEY WANT to continue the charade on a preface page or a cover-sheet[for those are BOTH recent additions in the last few years, NOT within the original document...NO mention ANYWHERE how planes and fire fell these three buildings on 9-11....AGAIN...the reason why YOU nor anyone else can POINT to a specific section WITHIN those 10,000 pages to support that LIE!

hence the reason YOU ONLY point to a FAQ of lies or a duhbunker site that TELLS what the reports 'REALLY' mean...huh....they need to SPECIALLY esplain it!

I find it funny that you cannot do one iota of actual research

I am the ONLY one posting DIRECT quotes SHOWING the science rom the ONLY entity within this Country to scientifically determine HOW and WHY....CHARGED to do so by an act of Congress.......you FAQ to death and flail around.

the 2005 NIST report is from 200 volunteer scientists whom COULD NOT find a scientific reason for collapse x3..
they found impacts caused MINIMAL damage to each...did NOT knock off fireproofing on the 240 columns on the impact floor NOT involved with impact damage...

NIST 1-6A Appendix C Passive Fire Protection p.274..."within the debris fields created by the aircraft impact into WTC 1 &2...thermal insulation was damaged and dislodged"

they also found......

"No conclusive evidence was found to indicate that pre-collapse fires were sever enough to have a significant effect on the microstructure that would have resulted in weakening of the steel structure." NIST NCSTAR 1-3C, p. 235

"no evidence the type of joining methods, materials, or welding procedures used was improper" NIST 1-3 p.99

"recovered bolts were stronger than typical" NIST 1-2 p.133

"no core column examined showed temp. above 250C" NIST 1-3 6.6.2

NCSTAR1-3 7.7.2 "because no steel was recovered from WTC7,it is not possible to make any statements about it's quality"

where are your SCIENTIFIC FINDINGS from the INITIAL scientists????????..no where to be seen.

Stage 1 (0 to 1.75 seconds): acceleration less than that of gravity (i.e., slower than free fall).
Stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): gravitational acceleration (free fall)
Stage 3 (4.0 to 5.4 seconds): decreased acceleration, again less than that of gravity
This analysis showed that the 40 percent longer descent time—compared to the 3.9 second free fall time

lmao!!!...you need to be on the next stage out of here!...free fall acceleration is an EVENT, is has a NEEDED prerequisite BEFORE it can even occur.....it's NOT a "PHASE" you can ADD TIME TO ON PAPER so it does not exist!!!!


and that prerequisite is a CLEAR unobstructed PATH below....

oh, and YOU want to quote the HYPOTHESIS of the 2008 NIST hypothesis crew, then continue with their 2008 webcast tech briefing where what YOU describe is a ...

"the phenomenon that we saw on 9/11 that brought this particular building down was really thermal expansion, which occurs at lower temperatures."

shyam Sunder and the hypothesis crew at the 2008 WTC7 tech briefing



..and they REFUSE to prove that OFFICIAL CLAIM of NEW science THROUGH science...

"NIST is withholding 68,246 files. These records are currently exempt from disclosure. All input and results files of the ANSYS 16 story and the LS-DYNA 47-story global collapse model that were used to simulate sequential structural failures leading to collapse."

I find it funny that you cannot do one iota of actual research, and instead prefer to demand answers and then ignore them when they do not fit your preconceived notions.

a reply to: GenRadek

During Stage 2, the north face descended essentially in free fall

as does the EAST, SOUTH and WEST ...

do ya know what the term 'global' means???

it means symmetrical, encompassing ALL

so you know what 'single unit' means???

moving as ONE.....during the event of FFA, there is NOTHING doing anything different a than anything else...reported by the 2005 NIST scientific investigation

NCSTAR 1A 3.6] "This free fall drop continues for approximately 8 stories, the distance traveled between t=1.75s and t=4.0s...constant, downward acceleration during this time interval. This acceleration was *9.8m/s^2*, equivalent to the acceleration of gravity."

NICSTAR 1A 4.3.4] Global Collapse..."The entire building above the buckled column region moved downward in a single unit, as observed, completing the global collapse"

NCSTAR1A p.39/130
"the damage from the debris from WTC 1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of WTC 7."

moving downward as a single unite at an acceleration rate EQUAL to g.


now just to be clear on this, you do know your ENTIRE spew you copied is what I post on every WTC7 thread.....

"the phenomenon that we saw on 9/11 that brought this particular building down was really thermal expansion, which occurs at lower temperatures."

tell me, what good is science if they refuse to acknowledge it?

Stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): gravitational acceleration (free fall)
Stage 3 (4.0 to 5.4 seconds): decreased acceleration, again less than that of gravity
This analysis showed that the 40 percent longer descent time

tell me in your own words HOW stage 3 adds time to stage 2 to make it not occur.........even though it did.

a reply to: hgfbob

Its entertaining watching you froth at the mouth that somehow someway, NIST is all wrong, that they prove that the WTCs were not suppose to have collapsed the way they did without some magical assistance, and yet what does NIST say in the end?

Cause of collapse: Impact damage from airplane impact affecting structure and fires started by jet fuel which then spread via office fire load, causing floor trusses to deform and sag pulling in the exterior columns, which brought about total collapse.

So why are you cherry picking quotes that only support your idea, but ignore the final ultimate conclusion that completely disproves you?? That is beyond hilarious!!

Also, can you please stop jumping from WTC1+2 and WTC7 and acting as if they are the same? You keep mixing them together and it is very difficult to read what you are arguing about.

Your "evidence"

"No conclusive evidence was found to indicate that pre-collapse fires were sever enough to have a significant effect on the microstructure that would have resulted in weakening of the steel structure." NIST NCSTAR 1-3C, p. 235

no evidence the type of joining methods, materials, or welding procedures used was improper NIST 1-3 p.99

recovered bolts were stronger than typical. NIST 1-2 p.133

"no core column examined showed temp. above 250C" NIST 1-3 6.6.2

NCSTAR1-3 7.7.2 "because no steel was recovered from WTC7,it is not possable to make any statements about it's quality"

I have noticed that a lot of those same quotes you use are all cherry picked and splattered across numerous 9/11 Truther boards in the same way. And yet, I am actively going through and trying to pull up every quote and with some of them I am having difficulty in pinpointing which report those quotes came from.

But lets break down your claims:

"no core column examined showed temp. above 250C" NIST 1-3 6.6.2

You left out this:

Note that these core columns represent less than 1 percent of the core columns on floors involved with fire and cannot be considered representative of any other core columns.

Here too:

"No conclusive evidence was found to indicate that pre-collapse fires were sever enough to have a significant effect on the microstructure that would have resulted in weakening of the steel structure."

you left out:

NIST has documented approximately 3 percent of all perimeter columns and 1 percent of all core columns
intersecting floors with pre-collapse fires. Thus, the preceding forensic analysis does not, and cannot,
give a picture of temperatures seen by the vast majority of perimeter and core columns.

no evidence the type of joining methods, materials, or welding procedures used was improper NIST 1-3 p99

you left out:

The welds appeared to perform as intended during service. With the exception of the mechanical floors, the major failure mechanism for perimeter panel column splices was fracture of the bolts. At mechanical floors, where splices were welded in addition to being bolted, the majority of the splices did not fail.
Spandrel connections on exterior panels at or above the impact zone were more likely than those below this region to experience bolt hole tear out as a failure mode. For those exterior panels below the impact zone, there was higher propensity for the spandrels to be ripped off from the panels.
There did not appear to be any difference in failure mode for the spandrel connections whether the exterior panels were exposed to fire or not.

yours:

recovered bolts were stronger than typical. NIST 1-2 p.133

This was actually found in NIST 1-3 pg 116. You should really check your sources, if they cannot get this part right.

Furthermore, the recovered bolts were stronger than contemporaneous literature suggests as typical.

And this means what exactly? That the bolts did their jobs as specified and were not as weak as previously thought. This doesn't add anything to the conspiracy or whatever it is you are trying to prove. Also notice in the earlier quote from the NIST report, they mention that

the major failure mechanism for perimeter panel column splices was fracture of the bolts

You do understand what shear strength and tensile strength is correct? Also you may want to read this part from NIST NIST 1-3 E.3.3 pg. xl

In the recovered trusses, a large majority of the electric resistance welds at the web-to-chord connections failed. Failure of the connection between the floor truss and perimeter panel floor truss connectors was typically a result of tab plate weld and bolt failure.

yours:

NCSTAR1-3 7.7.2 "because no steel was recovered from WTC7,it is not possable to make any statements about it's quality"

So? It may shock you, but NIST also did not recover steel or do a report of WTC buildings 3,4, 5, and 6. Why? No one died and their mode of destruction was obvious. I believe the only one that had any sort of interesting incident was WTC5 where there were internal floors that collapsed from fires as well. FEMA did a preliminary study on those buildings. You can read more here:
9/11 Fema Report


So what you have posted was all really garbage because most of it had key parts missing, or was misunderstood, or improperly sourced. You see, I have read NIST's reports and have a good understanding of what they said. You did not. But hey, for laughs, here is the link for every page of NIST. It may do you wonders, instead of just copying and posting from other ill-informed, misinformed, dubious "truther" websites.
NIST Final Report pdfs

a reply to: GenRadek

So why are you cherry picking quotes that only support your idea, but ignore the final ultimate conclusion that completely disproves you?? That is beyond hilarious!!

lol...cherry-pick.....how bout YOU try....post ONE scientific FACT from the initial NIST that supports the official claims of the latter HYPOTHESIS crew....

I notice ALL your postings are void of this.....you seem to PUSH agenda without having to prove.

and what is the conclusion...NEW science they refuse to prove through science....a new never before seen physics phenomenon where low temp steel is REMOVED by a special process only know to them.

So? It may shock you, but NIST also did not recover steel or do a report of WTC buildings 3,4, 5, and 6. Why? No one died and their mode of destruction was obvious.

WTC3,4,5 and 6 did NOT mimic the collapses as the other three....DESPITE more initial damage......5 burnt for two days.....NO COLLAPSE!

NO building collapse has ever mimicked the 9-11 three ever...for any reason........cept 'controlled'.

if they did it for the dead....WHY did they stall so long till the evidence was destroyed??????

FEMA did a preliminary study on those buildings

lmao...you really wanna discuss the FEMA C?

a reply to: hgfbob


NIST acknowledges that there was some gravitational acceleration during the collapse. It means that the building's internal systems were already damaged or gone due to internal collapses. Hence why for a brief moment, it fell with little resistance. But there was still resistance.

As for thermal expansion, what are you complaining about?? They did acknowledge it. In fact, it is one of the reasons they say WTC7 collapsed!!! That and thermal creep. Boy oh boy are you behind the times!!

From their own report:

Factors contributing to the building failure were: thermal expansion occurring at temperatures hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in design practice for establishing structural fire resistance rating; significant magnification of thermal expansion effects due to the long-span floors, which are common in office buildings in widespread use; connections that were designed to resist gravity loads, but not thermally induced lateral loads; and a structural system that was not designed to prevent fire-induced progressive collapse.

I did find it funny that once again, you have cherry picked quotes again!!
Like this gem:

Global Collapse..."The entire building above the buckled column region moved downward in a single unit, as observed, completing the global collapse"

Now lets highlight that part in context shall we? The bolding is the part you left out, italics is what you have cherry-picked:

The probably collapse sequence that caused the global collapse of WTC7 involved initiation of the buckling of a critical interior column in that vicinity. This column had become unsupported over nine stories after initial local fire-induced damage led to a cascade of local floor failures. The buckling of this columns led to a vertical progression of floor failures up to the roof, and led to the buckling of adjacent interior columns to the south of the critical column. An east-to-west horizontal progression of interior columns followed, due to loss of lateral support to adjacent columns, forces exerted by falling debris, and load redistribution from other buckled columns. The exterior columns buckled as the failed building core moved downward, redistributing its loads to the exterior columns. Global collapse occurred as the entire building above the buckled region moved downward as a single unit. This was a fire-induced progressive collapse, also known as disproportionate collapse, which is defined as the spread of local damage, from an initiating event, from element to element, eventually resulting in the collapse of an entire structure, or a disproportionately large part of it.

Do you understand this part? So in layman terms, the interior structure collapsed first, with some elements hanging NINE floors after interior floors collapse from fires alone. Once the "global collapse" started, you had nine floors of open space below. There is your "free-fall" moment.

a reply to: hgfbob

I posted a whole bunch of facts from NIST. I posted the actual reports and clarified your cherry picked quotes.And why do you mention the initial report? The final report is the main part. Duh?

NEW science they refuse to prove through science....a new never before seen physics phenomenon where low temp steel is REMOVED by a special process only know to them.

What new science?? What the hell are you blabbering about? what never before seen physics phenomenon??? Where is low temp steel removed by a special process only known to them??? Are you that confused or just trolling now?

Thermal expansion. Only new and never before seen to the uneducated and clueless. Not so much to the rest of us. Nothing new.

a reply to: GenRadek

I posted a whole bunch of facts from NIST.

what makes them FACTS....is the SCIENCE behind it.....post the spot from WITHIN the report where it states anything you spew.

NIST acknowledges that there was some gravitational acceleration during the collapse. It means that the building's internal systems were already damaged or gone due to internal collapses.

oh really...is that what that means......you have one group saying 105 VERTICAL FEET of continuous GLOBAL UNIFIED acceleration equal to g.


....and you have the latter group....claiming it occurred within......from a new phenomenon they refuse to prove.

Now lets highlight that part in context shall we? The bolding is the part you left out, italics is what you have cherry-picked:

"The probably collapse sequence that caused... "

how does the word..."probable"...denote fact?

What new science?? What the hell are you blabbering about? what never before seen physics phenomenon??? Where is low temp steel removed by a special process only known to them??? Are you that confused or just trolling now?

Thermal expansion. Only new and never before seen to the uneducated and clueless. Not so much to the rest of us. Nothing new.

fact 1...FFA occurred globally and unified in WTC 7 @ 1.75 seconds to 4.0s.

fact 2....The significance of FREEFALL is NONE of the gravitational energy is available to destroy the supporting structures, ALL converted to MOTION!

meaning, any bending, crushing, breaking connections, REMOVAL of structural RESISTANCE, BELOW the mass ACCELERATING, is occurring WITHOUT the assistance of energy from the mass accelerating. Zero resistance.

fact 3...

"the phenomenon that we saw on 9/11 that brought this particular building down was really thermal expansion, which occurs at lower temperatures."

"phenomenon"....An unusual, significant, or unaccountable fact or occurrence; a marvel.

tell me more bout this.....Phenomenon of science......where fire at one end of the building created conditions for global unified FFA for 1/3 of it's 6.5 seconds collapse.

The Topic:

Is the 9/11 Forum Dying?

Has been more than covered and due to the bickering and constant regurgitation of material that has been posted ad-nausea, this thread is now closed

Semper