Trying to resolve 9/11

a reply to: Hulseyreport

And we have not even gotten to the point there is zero evidence of pyrotechnic charges being planted before 9/11. And not even gotten to the point there is zero chance a sophisticated CD system with hundreds of charges would survive being hit from debris from the twin towers and the wide spread fires to initiate the collapse as captured in the video evidence.

And WTC 5 had fires. Was hit with twin tower debris. Like WTC 7. And WTC 5 had the below known floor connection failures and buckling.



What was different in WTC 7 from WTC 5 that would make such documented failures impossible in WTC 7?

You certainly do live in fictional world. 

NIST believe is interior buckling collapse took place before the  real collapse occurs.

What intensifies when the interior columns buckle?

Pull down of floors! What happens then? Building frame warps and twists across the width of the building. Is there a sign of this on video ( NO!)

You can not just hollow the interior and believe the outside frame would remain the same. It's laughable the debunkers think a building would remain the same shape with the steel and connections removed

Try using your brain sometime. 

Exteriors walls will drag inward, when the 47 floors disappear.  NIST theory about hollowed out building is laughable. 

My believe is the Penthouse collapse was a local collapse or some shortcoming weaknesses occurred around the core prior to the main event of collapse. NIST theory make little sense here. 

Column in your picture.

Why has it not failed?

Open your eyes. No collapse of beams and girders after a fire.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Because it didn’t lose enough lateral support. Lateral support is provided by the floor system to keep the width of the columns smaller, cheaper, and more economic to build a structure. And it shows floor connections failures cause floor systems failures.


Now...

What was different in WTC 7 from WTC 5 that would make such documented failures impossible in WTC 7?

Stop changing the subject...

This was the argument last night.

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: Hulseyreport


Listen turn up the volumne-open your ears.

Listen turn up the volumne-open your ears and try and find the same boom on this video.






It's not there.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

No steel framed constructed building has ever collapsed due to fire before 9/11 is not evidence enough for you?

Name one building that caught fire that minimized concrete columns and had long floor spans like WTC 1, 2, and 7?

WTC 5 proves steel connection failures and collapse initiation of the WTC structures was very possible.



Now.

Didn’t Gage also state the fires were no hotter than normal office fires? I guess that rules out hundreds of fires fueled from hundreds of thermite charges burning over 4,000 F before building movement?


Is there evidence that hundred of charges was doing the below in hundreds of locations with the assistance of kicker charges to misalign columns?



Hell no

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: Hulseyreport

Not every commercial mic that same quality. You got a woman speaking very loudly during an interview. So her volume may override the background noise.

Nobody in this video heard your boom. Nobody flinches. She doesn't hear it. The reporter doesn't hear it, you can watch him reflected her glasses. The camera man doesn't flinch. Nobody in the back ground makes a sound until the outside of the building starts to fall. Your boom is wind noise.

She further away from where the guy on the other video is located.

No. She is about 200' closer to WTC7 than the guy on the other video. I can give you the GPS long. and lat. for both cameras if you want

You

The building went from full support to zero support in a fraction of a second.

The truth movement lie you are pushing is being called out.

Another truth movement lie. What was the total time it took WTC 7 to collapse. How long did the vertical columns of WTC 1 and WTC 2 stand after the last of the floor systems hit the ground.


And your trying to change the subject.

Dude.

You are trying to falsely push the few expected sounds of pressurized systems cutting lose in a building fire and building collapse? Where there should be the sounds of hundreds of charges exploding. Sounds that should be obvious on any near by mic, awe inspiring, and would echo about Manhattan?

Sad.

Again..

Is there evidence that hundred of charges was doing the below in hundreds of locations with the assistance of kicker charges to misalign columns?



Hell no


Since there is ZERO EVIDENCE OF CD, what does that leave.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Again. The whole argument.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

Again.



If the above WTC 5 failures were repeated along the length of column 79 for example on enough floors, the result would be column 79 losing lateral support and buckling. That would lead to the penthouse sinking below the roof line and the progress interior collapse.

Now.

What’s it like to have no valid argument. No evidence. What’s it like not being able to answer the simplest questions.

You

The building went from full support to zero support in a fraction of a second.

The truth movement lie you are pushing is being called out.

Another truth movement lie. What was the total time it took WTC 7 to collapse. How long did the vertical columns of WTC 1 and WTC 2 stand after the last of the floor systems hit the ground.


And your trying to change the subject.

Dude.

You are trying to falsely push the few expected sounds of pressurized systems cutting lose in a building fire and building collapse? Where there should be the sounds of hundreds of charges exploding. Sounds that should be obvious on any near by mic, awe inspiring, and would echo about Manhattan?

Sad.

Again..

Is there evidence that hundred of charges was doing the below in hundreds of locations with the assistance of kicker charges to misalign columns?



Hell no


Since there is ZERO EVIDENCE OF CD, what does that leave.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Now.
Again. I’ll dig the cited source up if you like.

But.

WTC 7 showed visible signs of distress up to two minutes before the penthouse moved down in the form of structural distortion. Is that false.

Then the penthouse started to move downward. This shows that an internal progressive collapse was triggered before the facade moved down. Is that false.

The penthouse disappeared below the roof line before the facade moved down. Is that false.

More sources than NIST claimed the facade had three phases with the first phase accelerating slower than free fall acceleration. Is that false.

Now.

Now. Can you state an actual time.

And we have not even gotten to the point there is zero evidence of pyrotechnic charges being planted before 9/11. And not even gotten to the point there is zero chance a sophisticated CD system with hundreds of charges would survive being hit from debris from the twin towers and the wide spread fires to initiate the collapse as captured in the video evidence.

quote WTC 7 showed visible signs of distress up to two minutes before the penthouse moved down in the form of structural distortion. Is that false.

Yes its false. If you believe there a visible sign of collapse before that provide evidence. I deal with facts not opinion

Then the penthouse started to move downward. This shows that an internal progressive collapse was triggered before the facade moved down. Is that false.

False. Penthouse was supported prior to collapse. There no evidence of collapse below the 40th floor. If the eastside is hollowing out underneath I would like to see photographs to back that up.

The penthouse disappeared below the roof line before the facade moved down. Is that false.

True. When the corners moved down is when the building collapsed.

More sources than NIST claimed the facade had three phases with the first phase accelerating slower than free fall acceleration. Is that false.


False. This is NIST theory nobody else.

Stage 1 is fiction, though.

The time it took for roofline to come down 18 stories was 3.9 seconds. It depends on what time you start the clock.

5.4 second time with freefall is bulll#. They kept that fake time in their official report.

They claim stage 1 was buckling stage. NIST ignores the building had full support and then went to zero support in fraction of a second across the entire width of the building.

Another clue NIST wrong. Is the second structure had support just a half second before the collapse of the full building.

NIST hollowing out had already removed that support there.



What happened is the column interior and exterior columns seemed to let go in one to two seconds? And the corners of the building came down.

originally posted by: Hulseyreport
Then the penthouse started to move downward. This shows that an internal progressive collapse was triggered before the facade moved down. Is that false.

False. Penthouse was supported prior to collapse. There no evidence of collapse below the 40th floor. If the eastside is hollowing out underneath I would like to see photographs to back that up.

Completely BS. The penthouse did completely disappear below the roofline before the facade moved down with no evidence of charges setting off. With no reason to believe it would arrest. With evidence from the WTC 7 windows and the way WTC 7 visibly buckled/ moved that a complete column(s) buckled.

originally posted by: Hulseyreport
More sources than NIST claimed the facade had three phases with the first phase accelerating slower than free fall acceleration. Is that false.


False. This is NIST theory nobody else.

Stage 1 is fiction, though.

The time it took for roofline to come down 18 stories was 3.9 seconds. It depends on what time you start the clock.

5.4 second time with freefall is bulll#. They kept that fake time in their official report.

They claim stage 1 was buckling stage. NIST ignores the building had full support and then went to zero support in fraction of a second across the entire width of the building.

Sorry it’s a complete truth movement lie repeated by you. And utter BS. And I am being nice. Because it’s seems your the only one claiming this lie.

Complete BS by you. There is more than one source that cites the facade fell in three phases. Is that a false statement.

The first phase of the facade collapse had acceleration slower than the rate of free fall.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Again. The video evidence and seismic evidence shows...

Now.
Again. I’ll dig the cited source up if you like.

But.

WTC 7 showed visible signs of distress up to two minutes before the penthouse moved down in the form of structural distortion. Is that false.

Then the penthouse started to move downward. This shows that an internal progressive collapse was triggered before the facade moved down. Is that false.

The penthouse disappeared below the roof line before the facade moved down. Is that false.

More sources than NIST claimed the facade had three phases with the first phase accelerating slower than free fall acceleration. Is that false.

Now.

Now. Can you state an actual time.

And we have not even gotten to the point there is zero evidence of pyrotechnic charges being planted before 9/11. And not even gotten to the point there is zero chance a sophisticated CD system with hundreds of charges would survive being hit from debris from the twin towers and the wide spread fires to initiate the collapse as captured in the video evidence.

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Hulseyreport
Then the penthouse started to move downward. This shows that an internal progressive collapse was triggered before the facade moved down. Is that false.

False. Penthouse was supported prior to collapse. There no evidence of collapse below the 40th floor. If the eastside is hollowing out underneath I would like to see photographs to back that up.

Completely BS. The penthouse did completely disappear below the roofline before the facade moved down with no evidence of charges setting off. With no reason to believe it would arrest. With evidence from the WTC 7 windows and the way WTC 7 visibly buckled/ moved that a complete column(s) buckled.

NIST believe is from the 5th to 46th floors an internal collapse occurred on eastside prior to Penthouse leaving the roof. There is no evidence of an hollowing out on the eastside below the 40th floor coming up the side of the building
What you see is the supported Penthouse, it falls in and blowsglass windows to the 40th floor. Its evidence of a failure directly underneath the roofline!
This is an actual image of the Penthouse after moved off the roof! Windows breakage is evidence for a local failure on this side.

  Notice the secondary building not moving. If the interior columns had collapsed ( NIST claims) it be falling also in

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Hulseyreport
More sources than NIST claimed the facade had three phases with the first phase accelerating slower than free fall acceleration. Is that false.


False. This is NIST theory nobody else.

Stage 1 is fiction, though.

The time it took for roofline to come down 18 stories was 3.9 seconds. It depends on what time you start the clock.

5.4 second time with freefall is bulll#. They kept that fake time in their official report.

They claim stage 1 was buckling stage. NIST ignores the building had full support and then went to zero support in fraction of a second across the entire width of the building.

Sorry it’s a complete truth movement lie repeated by you. And utter BS. And I am being nice. Because it’s seems your the only one claiming this lie.

Complete BS by you. There is more than one source that cites the facade fell in three phases. Is that a false statement.

The first phase of the facade collapse had acceleration slower than the rate of free fall.

What sources? Post them.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Your just like the fountain BS.

That is your unfounded opinion which is not reflected on the actual video, seismic, and physical evidence.

And I can say grey aliens hyper jumped into the building and cut floor connections with grinders. But there is no proof.

So that brings us back to...

Now.

Didn’t Gage also state the fires were no hotter than normal office fires? I guess that rules out hundreds of fires fueled from hundreds of thermite charges burning over 4,000 F before building movement?


Is there evidence that hundred of charges was doing the below in hundreds of locations with the assistance of kicker charges to misalign columns?



Hell no

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: Hulseyreport

Not every commercial mic that same quality. You got a woman speaking very loudly during an interview. So her volume may override the background noise.

Nobody in this video heard your boom. Nobody flinches. She doesn't hear it. The reporter doesn't hear it, you can watch him reflected her glasses. The camera man doesn't flinch. Nobody in the back ground makes a sound until the outside of the building starts to fall. Your boom is wind noise.

She further away from where the guy on the other video is located.

No. She is about 200' closer to WTC7 than the guy on the other video. I can give you the GPS long. and lat. for both cameras if you want

You

The building went from full support to zero support in a fraction of a second.

The truth movement lie you are pushing is being called out.

Another truth movement lie. What was the total time it took WTC 7 to collapse. How long did the vertical columns of WTC 1 and WTC 2 stand after the last of the floor systems hit the ground.


And your trying to change the subject.

Dude.

You are trying to falsely push the few expected sounds of pressurized systems cutting lose in a building fire and building collapse? Where there should be the sounds of hundreds of charges exploding. Sounds that should be obvious on any near by mic, awe inspiring, and would echo about Manhattan?

Sad.

Again..

Is there evidence that hundred of charges was doing the below in hundreds of locations with the assistance of kicker charges to misalign columns?



Hell no


Since there is ZERO EVIDENCE OF CD, what does that leave.

Other than your total fantasy which is not supported by the video, audio, seismic, and physical evidence.

neutronflux

The second structure on the roof has not collapsed on video. NIST model the floors are gone with the interior columns. What supporting the second structure then? Use your brain.

NIST overlooked the second structure on the roof.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

So, let’s recap.

Your fantasy relies on hundredS of planted charges with no evidence of ever being planted, or taking up valuable rental space.

With no way hundred of charges connected in a sophisticated CD system would survive being hit with debris from the twin towers and the office fires to initiate collapse.

With no evidence in the seismic, audio, video of hundreds of charges simultaneously doing the below.


With no chance in hell a compromised CD system of slow and inconsistent burning thermite could perfectly cut columns in unison for your fantasy.

With no evidence from the video, audio, seismic evidence of columns being actively cut.

With you basing your fantasy on truth movement lies and falsehoods concerning the actual collapse.