UA Anchorage releases the final report on WTC-7: Fires DID NOT cause the collapse

a reply to: samkent

Not at all, and your point is well made & equally well taken.

My personal disbelief comes down to three factors

1) the cell phones connecting above 10,000 feet at speeds greater than ~150Mph
2) the speed (~500Mph) not causing catastrophic structural failure of the A/C (like with Egypt Air)
3) two aircraft cause three structural collapses when the impact of the aircraft are integral in the explanation of the unusual collapse (ie: only 3 steel buildings to ever collapse due to fire, etc)

That is the crux of my argument. There are indeed plenty of other competing & compelling theories out there, but for me personally answering those 3 questions would make a NIST-believer out of me

Because as it stands right now, I believe elements within our own government are treasonous SOB's

originally posted by: JBurns

If we're going with appeal to authority, Dr. XYZ, PHD probably has you beat

Article by Jeremy Stahl, "Architects Shy From Truther 9/11 Conspiracy," ARCHITECT, "the Magazine of the American Institute of Architects (AIA),

Quote:
The AIA itself, however, is firm about its relationship with Gage. “We don’t have any relationship with his organization whatsoever,” Scott Frank, head of media relations for the AIA, told me.

Quote:
All of Gage’s so-called evidence has been rebutted in peer-reviewed papers, by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, by the National Institute for Standards and Technology, by the American Society of Civil Engineers, by the 9/11 Commission Report, and, perhaps most memorably, by the 110-year-old engineering journal Popular Mechanics.

What is more interesting than these bizarre and debunked conspiracy theories is the way that Gage places his AIA membership front and center in his presentations. He seems to be attempting to cloak his organization in the officialdom of the venerable 155-year-old professional institution, even as AIA wants nothing to do with his organization.

Quote:
Gage often seems to wield his AIA status in promoting his conspiracy theories. In making his case, he also regularly cites that more than 100 AIA members and at least six AIA Fellows have signed his petition calling for a new investigation....

During the screening, Gage was at the very least intimating that his organization had been invited to AIA officially.

Quote:
“I can’t tell you how grateful we were to have been accepted to be here in the boardroom at the national headquarters,” Gage said. “We hope this is the beginning of a very productive relationship.”

Aside from Gage, though, there was not a single other architect in the room, much less an official from AIA, or even another member. The 80-strong crowd was made up largely of members of the local 9/11 Truth movement and other political activists.

Quote:
“It is somewhat troubling that he sort of portrays the notion that we have a relationship when we certainly do not,” Frank [Scott Frank, head of media relations for the AIA] said.

Quote:
Gage should not expect those invitations [to speak at future AIA conventions] any time soon, according to Frank: “There is absolutely zero relationship … [between our groups], nor will there ever be in the future.”

www.architectmagazine.com...

a reply to: Identified

I owe you an apology Identified, I was mis-replying (as I too often do) to the wrong person

I apologize for that, that's all on me, my mistake

originally posted by: JBurns

So what removed the fire retardant from WTC 7?

We can speculate all day about WTC 7 you can even call it controlled det near ground level much like the first time WTC were bombed, but in the end I know two things, one is the two towers were 100% brought down by the planes, and two IDK about WTC 7.

a reply to: waypastvne

I appreciate your reply and the effort you put into compiling it. I'm sure AIA is resolute in their defense of the NIST report, their desire to disassociate with Gage and accepting the multiple-leaps the NIST takes with this. I don't have the technical experience to refute that, nor will I try to cloak that fact.

The problem is, it doesn't answer a single one of the questions I presented

My personal disbelief comes down to three factors

1) the cell phones connecting above 10,000 feet at speeds greater than ~150Mph
2) the speed (~500Mph) not causing catastrophic structural failure of the A/C (like with Egypt Air)
3) two aircraft cause three structural collapses when the impact of the aircraft are integral in the explanation of the unusual collapse (ie: only 3 steel buildings to ever collapse due to fire, etc)

That is the crux of my argument. There are indeed plenty of other competing & compelling theories out there, but for me personally answering those 3 questions would make a NIST-believer out of me

Don't think your arguments are falling on deaf ears. I don't doubt your motives, your own knowledge and am certain you are solid in your own convictions.

With respect,
JB

a reply to: Xtrozero

I agree fully with WTC1 and WTC2, no doubt whatsoever about that either

767s, full of jet fuel, intentionally used like missiles. No doubts in my mind that is what brought them down. I saw the second hit as it happened (on TV not in person)

a reply to: JBurns

1)The only cell phones calls made from an aircraft on 9/11 were two from United Flight 93 and were when the plane was at a lower altitude than the cell towers on surrounding hills. United 93 was in a rural area at the time where cell signal from towers is greater than it would be in more populated urban areas.
All others were from AirPlane Phones.

2). It sure what you are talking about.

3) The science explains it. And there is always a first time for everything. Being the first time under such extraordinary circumstances doesn't mean conspiracy.

a reply to: JBurns

Apology accepted. Thank you.

originally posted by: JBurns


2) the speed (~500Mph) not causing catastrophic structural failure of the A/C (like with Egypt Air)

Structural failures occur because of exceeding the G limitations of the aircraft, not because of speed. Aviation is my field of expertise. If you want me to explain this I can.

originally posted by: JBurns

1) the cell phones connecting above 10,000 feet at speeds greater than ~150Mph

No clue about this...did the aircraft have cell phone service?

2) the speed (~500Mph) not causing catastrophic structural failure of the A/C (like with Egypt Air)

I do know about this with 30 years of flying under my belt and it was actually about 590 mph or 510 kts. This speed would exceed normal safety limits, but that doesn't mean it would just fly apart. It would also need to have the aircraft in a descent as the drag at level flight would be too much to reach that speed. I think Egypt Air was caused more to exceeding g load limits than anything else.

Bin Laden several years before 911 already with a $25 million dollar
bounty on his head by the FBI. (as if that isn't hokey enough right there)
Is easily found contacted and interviewed by ABC news.

No one could make this stuff up because fiction has to make sense.

Hokey!

originally posted by: JBurns

2) the speed (~500Mph) not causing catastrophic structural failure of the A/C (like with Egypt Air)

This is the NTSB report on Egypt Air 990.

www.ntsb.gov...

You should read it first so you have a clear idea of what really happened.

High speeds combined with large elevator movements is what destroyed EA990.

Oh look a blurry pic of an airplane I guess that settles it!

a reply to: carsforkids

That's is because it was a camera in a parking lot

You do not need a high speed camera in a parking lot

originally posted by: carsforkids
Bin Laden several years before 911 already with a $25 million dollar
bounty on his head by the FBI. (as if that isn't hokey enough right there)
Is easily found contacted and interviewed by ABC news.

No one could make this stuff up because fiction has to make sense.

Hokey!

When was the interview and when was the bounty placed on his head. Give us the dates.

Anyway...what was learned on that thread 13 years ago was they had Transits and Laser Doppler Vibrometers to watch the motion of the buildings that day, so knew WTC 7 was moving, bulging, and collapsing over a period of hours.

a reply to: Identified

Attended a seminar 6 months after 911 with FDNY chief officers who were at the WTC that day

Straight from the horse mouth ……….

Heard the whole chronology of operations that day

FDNY commanders ordered all men out and WTC 7 abandoned after 12 pm when got reports of fires breaking out
on multiple floors, structural damage to the south side caused by impact of WTC 1 , Standpipes and sprinkler systems
inoperable as were the elevators

Made determination than was to dangerous for men to enter the building

When Collapse unit arrived from RESCUE 3 in Bronx, Set up transit to watch the structure By 230pm could see that the
structure was moving out of plumb. FDNY chief Daniel Nigro ordered collapse zone set up around WTC 7 and all
personnel and equipment cleared

The conspiracy loons ignore this in favor of their own little fantasy

The steel was encapsulated in fire retardant material to give it 2 to 3 hours before it is weaken. What they were not counting on was 23,000 gallons of fuel... If steel is so indestructible below 1300f why would they ever even use fire retardant material in the first place?

a reply to: Xtrozero

What they were counting on was that the fire insulation would remain on the steel

Didn't count on having a jet airliner hit the building at 500 mph dislodging the fire proof material and exposing the steel

a reply to: neutronflux

I Openly admitted I do not know what caused the towers to collapse did you miss it? Why are you asking me about someone else's theory on what happened. I was not there I have spent over a decade pouring thru available information and what I think is the most plausible theory was not of my creation and I provided a link to it. Did you follow the link?
Of all of the theories currently out there and those that have yet to be developed I can truthfully state bear more truth than the garbage I read in the 911 commission report.



If you are going to post a bunch of pictures to this reply please make them relevant to debunking the claims in my original post so YOU can prove to everyone how 911 was not a false flag.

a reply to: waypastvne



ABC NEWS

We're no longer allowed to watch video I guess but you can see the date was in 98. But I
can't find it on you tube and I can't get the video to play at the link either.

Because?

1) the cell phones connecting above 10,000 feet at speeds greater than ~150Mph
2) the speed (~500Mph) not causing catastrophic structural failure of the A/C (like with Egypt Air)
3) two aircraft cause three structural collapses when the impact of the aircraft are integral in the explanation of the unusual collapse (ie: only 3 steel buildings to ever collapse due to fire, etc)

a reply to: JBurns

1 Calls from the aircraft were main with AIRFONES - using trunked VHF radio frequency to make calls from aircraft in flight

2 Aircraft don't normally operate at that speed at low altitudes - it eventually causes structural damage and metal fatigue
to the aircraft It doesn't mean the aircraft will fall apart immediately , but will sufferer reoccurring structural damage
from the stress

But the hijackers did not give a sh*t about condition of the aircraft as long as it hit building

3 WTC 7 suffered severe structural damage when WTC 1 (North Tower) collapse and the debris smashed the south façade of WTC 7 WTC 1 was only 100 meters from WTC 7, The impact of WTC 7 damaged WTC 7 and set off numerous fires in the building

originally posted by: nerbot

originally posted by: DAVID64
a reply to: Jchristopher5

The secondary conclusion of our study is that the collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.

In other words, demolition charges. Just like many have been saying for years.

And if WTC7 was a demolition, it speaks encyclopedias about the first two towers.

WE felt that the day it happened didn't we ATS?

The first words that fell out of my mouth when a friend turned on the TV that morning were "they did it to themselves".

I stand by that...whoever "they" are/were.

Amazing post. S&F. This is vindication.

Makes me believe we're living the Biological 9/11 via Covid right now - and makes my thoughts on that entirely in the fairway.

Great thread at the right time - thank you for posting this!