It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by esdad71
First, did I state 4/5 of something, or can you give me the link
that states this so I can investigate it. Thanks.
Can you give me examples of cahnging angle, for I thought that
175 did tilt prior to impact. The impact hit 6 floors in total I
beleive. Also, Close to half of the colums were severed or
damaged ( If I recall it was only 7 or 8 destroyed) .
This I cannot provide, but many SE's worked on this through ACSE with FEMA.
Originally posted by esdad71
I still do not believe they actually fell, but I have tried to understand within the bounds of the evidence that we have been given, and I feel there is no sufficient proof of demolition and I choose a theory that some do not go along with.
However, it was not designed to withstand column failure AND a fire that engulfed multiple floors.
Originally posted by esdad71
Aware and agree are two different things,
Originally posted by esdad71
Second, I have read the entire Jones article, and I am well aware
of the facts that he presents. However, I do not agree and you
do. It is a difference of belief.
Originally posted by esdad71
don't get into a pissing contest about sentence structure or spelling, becasue that shows you are reaching.
Originally posted by esdad71
I went to college in Florida and did graduate work in NY and FL.
Originally posted by esdad71
You are using a picture to explain away the use of thermite, yes, I am laughing. Can you please explain how weeks after the thermite was still burning.
Originally posted by esdad71
See, I feel like the questions are to trip me up which is why in other posts I never mentioned my background. I am not claiming to be an expert, or in the filed currently, but I have studied it. This give me insight as to how it may have occurred.
Originally posted by esdad71
Look, this is the first time I have said this in as many time as I have posted, but I have been involved in the engineering and architecture industry since I was in high school. I was using CAD in 86 at age 13, and designed my first home at 19. I then moved onto commercial structure and development, so I am well aware of how things are designed(blueprints), created (modeling)and what it takes for a project(building). I just never wanted to openly say it here because I did not want to be marked as a 'wanna be expert' like they try to tear apart Howard. I am familiar with a lot of the things we talk about with this case.
Originally posted by esdad71
I still do not believe they actually fell, but I have tried to understand within the bounds of the evidence that we have been given, and I feel there is no sufficient proof of demolition and I choose a theory that some do not go along with. That is what I must bear.
Originally posted by esdad71
However, it was not designed to withstand column failure AND a fire that engulfed multiple floors. Design is generally to give enough time for occupants to escape, and I believe now that is only 2 hours.
Originally posted by esdad71
You are using a picture to explain away the use of thermite, yes, I am laughing. Can you please explain how weeks after the thermite was still burning. Now, if you are talking about a thermite 'reaction' caused by the iron oxide released from the heated steel that remained under the collapse you may have something, but they are 2 different things. You are trying to say thermite bought it down, right?
Originally posted by svenglezz
Ok got' an idea......
Between "esdad71" and I we got over 40years experience in CAD ( I started in 1984 age 15)....so why don't we draw our own model....i would def. dev. time to this...I now people have made "plan" views but now with Autocad 2007 (omg the 3D so good now...prob. my mom could do...esp with 3D grip or funny name "HOT" grips)
But realy why not have a web site or ftp that have the DWG's of the structure we can
work on and anyone have time can contribute to the drawings?????
We can use my ASMEIL system def. help...just like helps for any project at any stage.
Plus with autocad having for FREE DwgTrue Convert and DwgTrue View...everyone
even ones without cad can view and print drawings no prob. (esdad71 def. download those programs for your use for work and home ...hope it helps)
Just an idea.
Y'r Canadian friend,
Sven
Originally posted by LAES YVAN
Originally posted by esdad71
Aware and agree are two different things,
Yes, and you said them both...
Originally posted by esdad71
Second, I have read the entire Jones article, and I am well aware
of the facts that he presents. However, I do not agree and you
do. It is a difference of belief.
Originally posted by esdad71
don't get into a pissing contest about sentence structure or spelling, becasue that shows you are reaching.
I have been trained with professional interrogation techniques, and just by listening to the words you use, the way you express your thoughts, and how you structure you sentences, I can learn a lot about your personality. I am trying to figure out exactly who you think you are, and why you believe the official story of 9-11. I have come to the conclusion that you are LOST, and the only reason you stick to the official story is because you are too afraid to think the US government could do such a thing. No matter what evidence is provided to you, you will stick with the official story because you are either a scared old patriot, disinformation agent, or you some how are affiliated with the whole cover up. I'm not reaching, just practicing one of many ways to break someone down, and peak into their minds.
Originally posted by esdad71
I went to college in Florida and did graduate work in NY and FL.
What college did you go to? Does that mean you do not have a degree in civil or environmental engineering?
Originally posted by esdad71
You are using a picture to explain away the use of thermite, yes, I am laughing. Can you please explain how weeks after the thermite was still burning.
First off, in previous posts, I didn't say WEEKS, I said DAYS. Although, Controlled Demolition Incorporated, the company assigned to clean up the WTC, has said on film with their own mouth that as they were digging to the bottom of the debris, the debris were getting hotter and hotter more towards the bottom. This was a few weeks after the collapse. And on film, they were pulling out pieces of metal that were still red hot, and dripping molten metal. It is possible with the right amount of thermite/thermate and the correct mixture of ingredients, you can make thermite/thermate burn for a long period of time. Even more so, if it is surrounded by other burning hot debris from the initial fires.
Originally posted by esdad71
See, I feel like the questions are to trip me up which is why in other posts I never mentioned my background. I am not claiming to be an expert, or in the filed currently, but I have studied it. This give me insight as to how it may have occurred.
Why did you say the following quote then?
Originally posted by esdad71
Look, this is the first time I have said this in as many time as I have posted, but I have been involved in the engineering and architecture industry since I was in high school. I was using CAD in 86 at age 13, and designed my first home at 19. I then moved onto commercial structure and development, so I am well aware of how things are designed(blueprints), created (modeling)and what it takes for a project(building). I just never wanted to openly say it here because I did not want to be marked as a 'wanna be expert' like they try to tear apart Howard. I am familiar with a lot of the things we talk about with this case.
I think you are really exaggerating your knowledge in the structural engineering field. Just because you can make shapes with AutoCAD, doesn't mean you can design a structurally solid building. If you don't have a degree in Civil and Environmental Engineering, you pretty much don't have any more knowledge than the average Google search.
How can you be familiar with how heat from fire reacts to the structure beams under stress, and tension? How can you be familiar with the changes in the stress and tension on a structure beam, when other beams fail? Most importantly, how on Earth can you say you have knowledge in the engineering field, and then say that a steel vertical structure can collapse so perfectly (referring to wtc7)?
WTC 7 "collapsed" like a wooden building only held together by tape. It did not "collapse" like a steel structure held together with rivets and welds. Steel buildings tilt and fall like trees being cut down. They do not naturally sink into the ground from the bottom, unless they are professionally demolished.
Originally posted by esdad71
I still do not believe they actually fell, but I have tried to understand within the bounds of the evidence that we have been given, and I feel there is no sufficient proof of demolition and I choose a theory that some do not go along with. That is what I must bear.
The following pictures are hard evidence that WTC 7 was demolished, this isn't "Professor Jones' evidence", this is 10000+ or more peoples evidence. I'm not giving in to anyone's beliefs, this is just so common sense that many people have thought of the same thing from different parts of the globe.
WTC info from NIST
Compared to a REAL controlled demo.
Originally posted by esdad71
However, it was not designed to withstand column failure AND a fire that engulfed multiple floors. Design is generally to give enough time for occupants to escape, and I believe now that is only 2 hours.
You are a joke. No structural engineer would ever design a building without the thought of a column failure AND a fire. The designer himself said that he and his partner designed the WTC to withstand earthquakes, fires, a Boeing 707 crash, and storms. No engineer on the face of the planet will ever design a building that cannot stand with multiple column failure. That is simply unheard of.
[edit on 24-8-2006 by LAES YVAN]
Originally posted by esdad71
WTC 5 and 6 were much smaller buildings that garnered much of their damage from debris.
The debris from the towers caused damage to the outside wall steel framing of WTC 5, but this damage did not cause any additional collapse of the floors. In fact, the steel pipe facade supports (mullions) provided structural redundancy to the floor framing and redistributed some portion of the cantilevered floors to other levels.
As illustrated in Figure 4-17, there was local buckling of interior columns. This buckling was most likely due to a combination of fire-induced reductions in strength and a possible increase in stress due to restrained thermal expansion. A detailed explanation of these issues is presented in Appendix A, Section A.3.1.4.
Originally posted by esdad71
Did you read the report? Stop looking at pictures and read something for a change. It references 2 other buildings that susteained the same type of damage from fire alone, without impact of debris and mulitple floor failure in parts. Are you bringing them into this discussion about "controlled demolitions"?