How people respond to 9/11 evidence counter to the official conspiracy theory

a reply to: MALBOSIA

Thought this was interesting?

Can you cite a college or university citing a different root cause for the collapse of the towers?

www.mace.manchester.ac.uk...

One Stop Shop in Structural Fire Engineering, Professor Colin Bailey, University of Manchester. All rights reserved.


Analysis

The impact of the plane crashes directly caused significant structural damages to both WTC towers. The towers resisted this level of damage and did not collapse immediately showing that the redundancy of the tube-frame structures enabled the redistribution of the loads from the damaged zones to the remaining structures.

However, it was generally believed that the impact also extensively striped off the fire protection materials from structural steel at least in the crashed zones. The multiple floors fires ignited by the jet fuel finally weakened the remaining structures and the towers collapsed.

It is worth noting that in the tube-frame system of the WTC towers, the lateral resistance or stability of the perimeter columns were provided by the composite floor truss system. This lateral restraint is reduced as the floor trusses weaken and sag in the heat. In a multiple floors fire, it was expected the effective length of laterally unrestrained perimeter columns would increase at least twice or triple. In addition to the direct thermal effects, the compressive resistance of these columns eventually reduced until a point that they could not sustain the applied load and buckling occurred.

The video footages showed that in WTC 1, the south perimeter columns of the fire floors had buckled before the top section of the tower tilted to the south and collapsed. On the other hand, in WTC 2, the east perimeter columns of the fire floors had also buckled before the top section of the tower tilted to the east and south and collapsed.

a reply to: MALBOSIA

I showed you pictures from video that you watched of clear and undeniable outward blast and you ignore it. It didnt fit with your crack pot conapiracy theory?

No. I cited sources what you posted was the tower leaning / titling before collapse. I asked you to cite a source the picture showed outward bowing which you never provided. Believe those professionals you are talking about, or you with no citable evidence of outward bowing. Another false argument you.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: MALBOSIA

You are the one that had to use false allegations.

You said you wanted a root cause investigated by professionals and backed by professionals? You said you wanted court testimony? You cannot answer simple questions?

So please explain what is more excepted as the root cause of the WTC collapses than fire and thermal stress by ANSI, NFPA, and the AIA? Please cite which root cause is backed by sworn testimony concerning WTC 7?

Its sad to see you only fool yourself?

Well dont let me tell you what to do, but you just spammed your theory again..

Fire/thermal/stress/collapse/fire/thermal/stress/collapse/fire/thermal/stress/collapse...

Why do you do that?

a reply to: MALBOSIA

Please quote where I ever said...

110 stories of columns were left standing?

I said the 29 floors for WTC 2, or 11 floors for WTC 1 , above the buckling fell into the tower below. Long lengths of vertical columns were left standing after the complete collapse of the floor system. The floor systems fell around 67 percent the rate of free fall. The vertical columns fell at 40 percent of the rate of free fall as captured by video evidence. The vertical columns toppled in the wake of the floors’ collapse as they lost later support.

Another false argument by you.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Please quote where I ever said...


"110 stories of columns were left standing? "

Ok

Especially in that the vertical columns are still standing in videos after the complete collapse of the floor system of the towers. 

Another false argument by you.

Another imaginative victory by you.

a reply to: MALBOSIA

They are probably backing NIST, but you wont back NIST so you back those that back NIST?

You are the one that wanted a root cause backed by professionals. American Institute of Architects have more voting members that back fire collapse / thermal stress as the root cause of the towers collapse than AE 9/11 Truth has “professional members”.

a reply to: MALBOSIA

One that is conducted and concluded by law enforcement.

Law enforcement did collect the forensic evidence by the hand shifting of WTC rubble. I did not know the average officer of the law had degrees in engineering, physics, and metallurgy to make valid studies and inspections of the WTC steel. Persons with demolitions expertise worked recovering the forensic evidence, and found no evidence of planted explosives. There are still engineers that provided testimony thermal stress / fire are the root cause of the WTC 7 collapse. If it was a criminal case, the court would use the same type of expert witnesses. Is that false.

a reply to: MALBOSIA

You know your the one pushing BS and spamming the same message over and over on every page

For the towers. If impact damage, thermal stress, and fire related damage did not lead to the inward bowing and buckling that initiated collapse as seen in video evidence, then cite a root cause more readily excepted by members of the AIA, ANSI, NFPA, and colleges and universities?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: MALBOSIA

I said the 29 floors for WTC 2, or 11 floors for WTC 1 , above the buckling fell into the tower below.

Not even close. WTC 1 the collapse went upward into the top section. I think you read too much Bazant.

WTC 2 the top fell off to the side at the first bit of resistance. The building came down on its own. Thats what I see and that seems to be all anyone is going off of and calling it "forensic evidence"

I have just as much expience of watching a 100 story building be destroyed in seconds, as anyone else on this planet.

Long lengths of vertical columns were left standing after the complete collapse of the floor system.

The "floor system" collapsed?

Dude. EVERYTHING collapsed.

The vertical columns toppled in the wake of the floors’ collapse as they lost later support.

Can you show me the video or image that conclusion was drawn from. I doubt it bares any meaning but i am no less curious.

Another false argument by you.

Another spam statement by you. Or is that your signature?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: MALBOSIA

You know your the one pushing BS and spamming the same message over and over on every page

For the towers. If impact damage, thermal stress, and fire related damage did not lead to the inward bowing and buckling that initiated collapse as seen in video evidence, then cite a root cause more readily excepted by members of the AIA, ANSI, NFPA, and colleges and universities?

That doesnt make your theories true.

a reply to: MALBOSIA

Would you like to refute this paper or just stamp it with BS?

Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse?—Simple Analysis
By Zdenˇek P. Baˇzant1, Fellow ASCE, and Yong Zhou2

www-math.mit.edu...

Closing Comments
Once accurate computer calculations are carried out, various details of the failure mecha- nism will doubtless be found to differ from the present simplifying hypotheses. Errors by a factor of 2 would not be terribly surprising, but that would hardly matter since the present analysis reveals order-of-magnitude differences between the dynamic loads and the structural resistance.
There have been many interesting, but intuitive, competing explanations of the collapse. To decide their viability, however, it is important to do at least some crude calculations. For example, it has been suggested that the connections of the floor-supporting trusses to the framed tube columns were not strong enough. Maybe they were not, but even if they were it would have made no difference, as shown by the present simple analysis.
The main purpose of the present analysis is to prove that the whole tower must have collapsed if the fire destroyed the load capacity of the majority of columns of a single floor. This purpose justifies the optimistic simplifying assumptions regarding survival made at the outset, which include unlimited plastic ductility (i.e., absence of fracture), uniform distri-bution of impact forces among the columns, disregard of various complicating details (e.g., the possibility that the failures of floor-column connections and of core columns preceded the column and tube failure, or that the upper tube got wedged inside the lower tube), etc. If the tower is found to fail under these very optimistic assumptions, it will certainly be found to fail when all the detailed mechanisms are analyzed, especially since there are order-of-magnitude differences between the dynamic loads and the structural resistance.
An important puzzle at the moment is why the adjacent 46-story building, into which no significant amount of aircraft fuel could have been injected, collapsed as well. Despite the lack of data at present, the likely explanation seems to be that high temperatures (though possibly well below 800◦C) persisted on at least one floor of that building for a much longer time than specified by the current fire code provisions.

a reply to: MALBOSIA

It it does make it a widely excepted root cause. A root cause the listed organizations made code changes based of off. Name a root cause that is seriously considered by the listed professional groups as a close second? Maybe the deficient fire proofing of the WTC?

a reply to: MALBOSIA

For you again.

www.skeptic.com...

9/11 and the Science
of Controlled Demolitions

3WHAT ABOUT THE ALMOST FREE-FALL COLLAPSE OF THE TWIN TOWERS? The key is the “almost” modifier. If I told you I was making almost $100,000 and you found out I was making only $67,000, you’d say I was exaggerating. So stop exaggerating the collapse speed of the WTC Towers! The 80,000 tons of structural steel slowed down the collapses of the Twin Towers to about ⅔ (two-thirds) of free-fall.3 And the core collapsed at about 40% of free-fall speed, coming down last.4 According to Richard Gage: “To bring a building symmetrically down, what we have to do is remove the core columns.” But on 9/11 the stronger core columns came down last, which violates this supposed most fundamental rule of controlled demolition.

9/11 Footage shows core of both towers standing; Debunks Basement BombsTheory
m.youtube.com...

WTC Collapses - Cores Visible

the-last-blog-left.blogspot.com...

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: MALBOSIA
I did not know the average officer of the law had degrees in engineering, physics, and metallurgy to make valid studies and inspections of the WTC steel.

But they should have been able to know if there was wiring for exosives? They were looking for survivors like everyone else and body parts.

Persons with demolitions expertise worked recovering the forensic evidence, and found no evidence of planted explosives.

Clarify that. The NYPD or FBI purposely sent explosives experts into the rubble to seek for and rule out explosive devices? Thats what you made it sound like.

There are still engineers that provided testimony thermal stress / fire are the root cause of the WTC 7 collapse. If it was a criminal case, the court would use the same type of expert witnesses. Is that false.

Johnny, a court case against who?

And your telling me that if a bunch of engineers and explosives experts were left with the images and video to decide if there was thermal/heat/stress/ or if explosives were used... your saying that they would agree with fire/thermal/heat/stress/collapse... ?

And I say images and videos because that is all there is left minus a couple relics. What ever was writen about the physical evidence can never be undone.

Thats a pretty high chair to play off of, isnt it, Johnny.

a reply to: MALBOSIA

Bowing and buckling of the towers before collapse was reported by law enforcement which should make you happy.

www.representativepress.org...

Before the collapse of either tower, evidence the structures of the WTC were failing was reported by Police, Firemen and civilians. As already mentioned, flying around outside the WTC, the NYPD helicopters reported "an inward bowing of the buildings' columns in the minutes before they collapsed."

9/11: Absolute Proof NO DEMOLITION at WTC Twin Towers -- "THE TOWER IS LEANING" & Buckling
m.youtube.com...

Report of tower buckling

9/11 - The Top of the North Tower Is Leaning - NYPD Warning
m.youtube.com...

a reply to: MALBOSIA

Again, false argument by you...

But they should have been able to know if there was wiring for exosives? They were looking for survivors like everyone else and body parts.

Remember this....

exhibitions.nysm.nysed.gov...

exhibitions.nysm.nysed.gov...

An Elaborate and Specialized Process
It was not until late fall of 2001 that a system used in commercial recycling centers was utilized at Fresh Kills. A long, round cylinder spun huge hunks of debris to loosen and separate fine particles from larger pieces. Once separated, the debris went onto a conveyor belt where New York City police and firefighters and Federal Bureau of Investigation agents searched for human remains, personal objects, and criminal evidence. Work could only be done in 45-minute shifts or the strain from watching the constantly moving material might result in vertigo.

The key part

exhibitions.nysm.nysed.gov...

where New York City police and firefighters and Federal Bureau of Investigation agents searched for human remains, personal objects, and criminal evidence

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Would you like to refute this paper or just stamp it with BS?

Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse?—Simple Analysis
By Zdenˇek P. Baˇzant1, Fellow ASCE, and Yong Zhou2

www-math.mit.edu...

Closing Comments
Once accurate computer calculations are carried out, various details of the failure mecha- nism will doubtless be found to differ from the present simplifying hypotheses. Errors by a factor of 2 would not be terribly surprising, but that would hardly matter since the present analysis reveals order-of-magnitude differences between the dynamic loads and the structural resistance.
There have been many interesting, but intuitive, competing explanations of the collapse. To decide their viability, however, it is important to do at least some crude calculations. For example, it has been suggested that the connections of the floor-supporting trusses to the framed tube columns were not strong enough. Maybe they were not, but even if they were it would have made no difference, as shown by the present simple analysis.
The main purpose of the present analysis is to prove that the whole tower must have collapsed if the fire destroyed the load capacity of the majority of columns of a single floor. This purpose justifies the optimistic simplifying assumptions regarding survival made at the outset, which include unlimited plastic ductility (i.e., absence of fracture), uniform distri-bution of impact forces among the columns, disregard of various complicating details (e.g., the possibility that the failures of floor-column connections and of core columns preceded the column and tube failure, or that the upper tube got wedged inside the lower tube), etc. If the tower is found to fail under these very optimistic assumptions, it will certainly be found to fail when all the detailed mechanisms are analyzed, especially since there are order-of-magnitude differences between the dynamic loads and the structural resistance.
An important puzzle at the moment is why the adjacent 46-story building, into which no significant amount of aircraft fuel could have been injected, collapsed as well. Despite the lack of data at present, the likely explanation seems to be that high temperatures (though possibly well below 800◦C) persisted on at least one floor of that building for a much longer time than specified by the current fire code provisions.

Bazant is an idiot. Crush-down/crush-up?!?!?

Give me a break.



Where is your beloved core that means so much to you in his BS theory?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Again, false argument by you...

But they should have been able to know if there was wiring for exosives? They were looking for survivors like everyone else and body parts.

Remember this....

exhibitions.nysm.nysed.gov...

exhibitions.nysm.nysed.gov...

An Elaborate and Specialized Process
It was not until late fall of 2001 that a system used in commercial recycling centers was utilized at Fresh Kills. A long, round cylinder spun huge hunks of debris to loosen and separate fine particles from larger pieces. Once separated, the debris went onto a conveyor belt where New York City police and firefighters and Federal Bureau of Investigation agents searched for human remains, personal objects, and criminal evidence. Work could only be done in 45-minute shifts or the strain from watching the constantly moving material might result in vertigo.

The key part

exhibitions.nysm.nysed.gov...

where New York City police and firefighters and Federal Bureau of Investigation agents searched for human remains, personal objects, and criminal evidence

What crime was being suspected? The plolice were seeking for and ruled out explosives? Did they at least make a statement?

Your telling me that LEO conducted an investigation into the use of explosives to bring down the towers and have publically ruled it out? Yes or no? You keep saying I am making false statments....

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Bowing and buckling of the towers before collapse was reported by law enforcement which should make you happy.

www.representativepress.org...

Before the collapse of either tower, evidence the structures of the WTC were failing was reported by Police, Firemen and civilians. As already mentioned, flying around outside the WTC, the NYPD helicopters reported "an inward bowing of the buildings' columns in the minutes before they collapsed."

9/11: Absolute Proof NO DEMOLITION at WTC Twin Towers -- "THE TOWER IS LEANING" & Buckling
m.youtube.com...

Report of tower buckling

9/11 - The Top of the North Tower Is Leaning - NYPD Warning
m.youtube.com...

Everyone saw that. We all said "that top is going tip over". Yipty do dah

a reply to: MALBOSIA

Quote where I ever posted a quote from Bazant?