UAF World Trade Center 7 Draft Report

originally posted by: carsforkids
Here is a building most likely of an inferior building code
collapsed by fire.

Now that's a fire!

And here is a building of superior design than the one above
collapsed by W/E.

Fire?

Anyone who refuses to acknowledge the difference isn't being honest
with themselves.

Please give a detailed description of the differences in design between the two buildings

a reply to: mrthumpy

WHY?

I see no reason for that when I already supplied the vids.

You do see the difference in fires don't you?

originally posted by: carsforkids
a reply to: mrthumpy

WHY?

Because you are claiming to know something about the design of the two buildings

a reply to: mrthumpy

Do you see the difference?

Because you are claiming to know something about the design of the two buildings

Prove me wrong?

originally posted by: carsforkids
a reply to: mrthumpy

Do you see the difference?

Because you are claiming to know something about the design of the two buildings

Prove me wrong?

Very difficult to make out any design features in your photos. I take it you're just making claims without any knowledge

a reply to: mrthumpy

Do you see the difference? In the fires miho?

Very difficult to make out any design features in your photos. I take it you're just making claims without any knowledge

Take it however you like but I never said my claims were without knowledge.

originally posted by: carsforkids
a reply to: mrthumpy

Take it however you like but I never said my claims were without knowledge.

So answer my original question

a reply to: mrthumpy

You don't have an original question. The original question is very simple
to answer with no reason for you to avoid it like the plague.
Do you see the difference in the two separate fires?
Answer the question so we can move on?

originally posted by: carsforkids
a reply to: mrthumpy

You don't have an original question. The original question is very simple
to answer with no reason for you to avoid it like the plague.
Do you see the difference in the two separate fires?
Answer the question so we can move on?

I'll quote it for you

Please give a detailed description of the differences in design between the two buildings

originally posted by: carsforkids
a reply to: mrthumpy

My point is why would I debate something with you when
you can't even acknowledge a simple difference like the
one posed in my original post?

All you have to do is say what any four yo kid would say. lol
But you can't do it!

You do realise that you claimed there were differences in the designs of the two buidings?

a reply to: mrthumpy

You do realise that you claimed there were differences in the designs of the two buidings?

Oh I was more than meticulous with my words. Why are you evading
the main point of my post?

Do you see the difference?

In the fires?

originally posted by: carsforkids
a reply to: mrthumpy

You do realise that you claimed there were differences in the designs of the two buidings?

Oh I was more than meticulous with my words. Why are you evading
the main point of my post?

Do you see the difference?

In the fires?

In what way was the design of WTC7 superior to the other building?

a reply to: mrthumpy

In what way was the design of WTC7 superior to the other building?

If you can't tell by the difference in fires alone. You have no business
debating this topic.

originally posted by: carsforkids
a reply to: mrthumpy

In what way was the design of WTC7 superior to the other building?

If you can't tell by the difference in fires alone. You have no business
debating this topic.

here is a building of superior design than the one above

In what way was it superior?

originally posted by: carsforkids
a reply to: mrthumpy

In what way was it superior?

Obviously you have no business debating anything.

Erm, that's what I'm trying to do but unfortunately you didn't think through what you were posting.

Might have been better to leave out the vague statements about the design of the buildings that you thought were strengthening your point

a reply to: mrthumpy

Erm, that's what I'm trying to do but unfortunately you didn't think through what you were posting. Might have been better to leave out the vague statements about the design of the buildings that you thought were strengthening your point

The " Vague statements " as you refer have everything to do
with the main point. They do strengthen my point. I just been
try'n to get you to see that! Unbelievable! Do you see the difference
in fires or not? lol

Please I'm begging you for the love of gawd just answer the gawd damn question?

originally posted by: carsforkids
a reply to: mrthumpy

Erm, that's what I'm trying to do but unfortunately you didn't think through what you were posting. Might have been better to leave out the vague statements about the design of the buildings that you thought were strengthening your point

The " Vague statements " as you refer have everything to do
with the main point. They do strengthen my point.

OK so describe the differences in the designs of the buildings

a reply to: carsforkids

I think the answer is the WTC buildings minimize concrete usage beyond common practice. The WTC buildings had longer unsupported floor spans beyond common practice with no mid length supports. Used less columns beyond common practice. Meaning little or no mid length columns. The WTC building were known to have deficient fire insulation. WTC 7 had odd angle floor connections not used in most building designs. The long floor lengths made the WTC more susceptible to thermal stress. WTC 7 spanned over a large subterranean electrical substation.

And WTC 5 shows fire related failures were very possible in WTC buildings.