BBC News Reports Building 7 collapse 23 Minutes before it collapses.

Originally posted by Identified
Army tools used at the WTC site:

www.globalsecurity.org...

These were brought in to help with the rescue effort later on the 13th. From your article:

Toni Quiroz, former chief of the computer networking branch at Cecom, arrived at the site Sept. 13 and was assigned as team leader to assist in the rescue efforts.

Just FYI.

I was wondering if a FOIA would be a thought regarding CECOM and if they even have this data from WTC 7. I am still not sure they were on the scene before WTC 7 fell?

Ah yes, CECOM was brought in on the 13th.

so we must now go to the FDNY. It is possible they have no computer and was merely doing visual checks. So now I am not sure what sort of physical evidence of the readings would remain in a case like that.

But I am interested why this hasn't been asked of them.





[edit on 28-2-2007 by Identified]

One explanation is the intended demolition theory, the other one is that the emergency workers used this surveying transit equipment on the building and realised it was increasingly unstable.

This is an analogy used by someone more knowledgeable than I am about engineering in another thread.

If part of the corner of the building of WTC7 was knocked out and damaged and the building was tilting why would in not fall over to the side it was tilting to?

To visualize this yourself take a four legged chair and knock one of the legs out.
Does it fall to the side? Or does it fall straight down?

this sound is from wtc 7

Originally posted by etshrtslr

One explanation is the intended demolition theory, the other one is that the emergency workers used this surveying transit equipment on the building and realised it was increasingly unstable.

This is an analogy used by someone more knowledgeable than I am about engineering in another thread.

If part of the corner of the building of WTC7 was knocked out and damaged and the building was tilting why would in not fall over to the side it was tilting to?

To visualize this yourself take a four legged chair and knock one of the legs out.
Does it fall to the side? Or does it fall straight down?

THE NIST report addresses all those questions.

Cheers Hal, I'd missed that. Still gonna quote it in the new post as it may be relevant to the type of technology that is available for the job, and the article isn't especially clear on the chronology of events.

Thread regarding measurement of building stability started here

[edit on 28-2-2007 by Giordano Bruno]

THE NIST report addresses all those questions.

If it does can you post the page it addresses those questions on?

From what I understand NIST has hired a outside firm to determine what caused the collapse of WTC 7. And that report has yet to be published

Originally posted by etshrtslr

THE NIST report addresses all those questions.

If it does can you post the page it addresses those questions on?

From what I understand NIST has hired a outside firm to determine what caused the collapse of WTC 7. And that report has yet to be published

wtc.nist.gov...

Then entire report of 42 pages goes into those questions. No short version. You will have to read it all and understand the science.

Popular Mechanics has said this:
NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST's analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of "progressive collapse," a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse.

According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."



[edit on 28-2-2007 by Identified]

You're much more familiar with the circumstances surrounding the collapse of WTC-7 than I thought, Identified.

This topic is getting de-railed.

We know building 7 came down at free-fall speed into it's own foot print, which defies the laws of physics unless demolition was used.

We have the videos of police and firefighters saying get back, the building is coming down it's going to blow up, in the minutes before the collapse.

Now, this video from the BBC, which they admit is authentic, is just further proof of prior knowledge to the fact that building 7 was demolished.

Originally posted by Identified

According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."

[edit on 28-2-2007 by Identified]

why build rudy giuliani command bunker in that building then.

if it was such a badly designed building

Originally posted by tombangelta

Originally posted by Identified

According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."

[edit on 28-2-2007 by Identified]

why build rudy giuliani command bunker in that building then.

if it was such a badly designed building

This is off topic again. The building wasn't badly designed. It just wasn't designed to withstand every combination of events that day.

Originally posted by tombangelta
why build rudy giuliani command bunker in that building then.

if it was such a badly designed building

Or the CIA, or IRS...

Off topic yet again but more info regarding WTC 7 and the structure of the building.

www.fema.gov...

Originally posted by tombangelta
this sound is from wtc 7

sounds like a explosive demolition, much like this one...

its scary how much they sound alike.

r4758,

If the speed of the fall deductively proves that it was a demolition then that should be the main argument of the 911truthers, as it does away with the need for the complex cumulative argument. If that alone makes the demolition theory a fact, then nobody could have predicted that type of collapse, other than those involved, and the original source of the warning was directly connected to the perps.

If...

edit: yeah those videos sound flippin' similar! How do you know it was wtc7?


[edit on 28-2-2007 by Giordano Bruno]

Originally posted by Identified
Off topic yet again but more info regarding WTC 7 and the structure of the building.

www.fema.gov...

Yes, fema tries to tell us that building 7 came down like a house of cards without explaining how the support columns were destroyed so precisely to allow for a freefall collapse into it's own footprint.

www.wtc7.net...

[edit on 28-2-2007 by r4758]

Originally posted by r4758

Originally posted by Identified
Off topic yet again but more info regarding WTC 7 and the structure of the building.

www.fema.gov...

Yes, fema tries to tell us that building 7 came down like a house of cards without explaining how the support columns were destroyed so precisely to allow for a freefall collapse into it's own footprint.

HOuse of cards? Is that the actual technical term FEMA used?

Or did they say that the transfer trusses across floors 5 and 7 weakened causing a failure in the center of the building and then a progressive collapse?

Originally posted by Giordano Bruno
r4758,

If the speed of the fall deductively proves that it was a demolition then that should be the main argument of the 911truthers, as it does away with the need for the complex cumulative argument. If that alone makes the demolition theory a fact, then nobody could have predicted that type of collapse, other than those involved, and the original source of the warning was directly connected to the perps.

If...

edit: yeah those videos sound flippin' similar! How do you know it was wtc7?


[edit on 28-2-2007 by Giordano Bruno]

Well said Bruno!! sound logic spoken clearly and consice.