Building 7, the untold story *slide show*

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Except, as has been shown many times on ATS, the fires werent sporadic or only on a couple floors. Nor was the major damage "asymmetrical".

You have film of a fully involved fire? I'd like to see it if it's been posted many times.

Also, how was the damage anything BUT asymmetrical? Or were all columns severed at the same time? If so, the building wuld have came down when damaged.

reply to post by Pilgrum


NIST (or FEMA) says that the fuel was found intact. Meaning, no super duper fuel fires. BTW, hydrocarbon won't melt steel.

Also, NIST has still yet to publish their findings on WTC 7, but you and swamp know exactly what happened?

NIST (or FEMA) says that the fuel was found intact. Meaning, no super duper fuel fires. BTW, hydrocarbon won't melt steel.

Here we go again - FIRE CANT MELT STEEL - repeat ad infineum

You dont have to melt the steel in order for it to fail - just apply
enough heat to cause it to become plastic and begin to yield

At 1000 F (550C) steel retains only 1/2 of original strength, 1200 F (600 C)
it is 1/4. Also you do not need to heat the entire building, only a
few columns heated to failure point will suffice. As the columns begin
to yield, stress is transferred to other parts of structure. If that structure
is compromised then the building will fail as the stress overloads it.

Originally posted by Griff

NIST (or FEMA) says that the fuel was found intact. Meaning, no super duper fuel fires. BTW, hydrocarbon won't melt steel.

Also, NIST has still yet to publish their findings on WTC 7, but you and swamp know exactly what happened?

I don't claim to know exactly what happened but the contents of that building are frequently overlooked by those proposing CD as the only possibility.

A lot of diesel fuel was pumped out of a couple of the larger inground tanks but not all and there were receiver tanks (smaller ones) upstairs for the pumped fuel. Agreed that hydrocarbon fuels don't melt steel but did it have to actually melt to cause a critical failure?

I'm sure the NIST findings will be controversial and generally unaccepted in certain circles.

Originally posted by thedman
Here we go again - FIRE CANT MELT STEEL - repeat ad infineum

You dont have to melt the steel in order for it to fail - just apply
enough heat to cause it to become plastic and begin to yield

At 1000 F (550C) steel retains only 1/2 of original strength, 1200 F (600 C)
it is 1/4. Also you do not need to heat the entire building, only a
few columns heated to failure point will suffice. As the columns begin
to yield, stress is transferred to other parts of structure. If that structure
is compromised then the building will fail as the stress overloads it.

Here we go again ad naseum.

Even at 1/2 strength, the steel (being designed with a factor of safety of at least 2) will NOT fail as you say.

Please show us in history where a steel framed building has globally collapsed due to this condition.

You can't.

Dr. Steven Jones, physicist, presenting new evidence - results of energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy of WTC dust, which perfectly match with thermite ... all » residues, thus providing irrefutable scientific evidence for use of thermite in WTC .

Google Video Link

Owned.

can you say pullit?

That is the full length above.

For convenience, here is a very short segment - with the smoking gun evidence.

Google Video Link

oh yeah

pull it

I dont think that we are arguing that fire cannot melt steel. I think the point that some of us are trying to make is that if the fire melted the steel and the building collapsed, then it would not have collapsed the way that it did. The way that the building went down was 100% consistent with a controlled demolition of a building that size. It fell fast, with no resistence, and it fell into its own footprint, as to not damage surrounding buildings.

From what all of us have seen, there is no evidence that shows the fires and damage to the building was enought to cause it to fail in that manner. If you have any evidence proving otherwise then show it.

Once again, people I ask you to look for the MOTIVE behind why WTC7 would need to be fallen that day.

It was brought down on purpose to cover up the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) ongoing investigations into illegal activities in the stock market and corporate mismanagement (think Enron) by destroying key evidence, like computers and paperwork. Corporate America was under attack, they needed to put an end to that.

Why did another multi-million dollar building fall over 200 feet away from the towers after having received some cosmetic damage? 40 stories...straight down...no way man, anyway you look at it. Keep in mind, our government can kill 6 or 7 servicemen that flew live nukes in the USA last August and cover that up! Auto accidents and apparent suicides (hmm), while state investigators saying things like they had no knowledge of what I am talking about or this nuke incident or maybe they would have "investigated better"!

Destruction of key evidence when someone is looking to be held accountable. This is the Bush Admins MO for Gods sake....emails...gone...videotapes...gone...The Pentagon was hit for the same reasons. Anyone remember the day before 911, Rumsfield anounced the "loss" (untrackable) of a trillion dollars in defense spending and how things needs to be changed and properly recorded? The next day the Pentagon was hit. You know how many of those 189 dead at the Pentagon were accountants? Wake up people, you have been lied to, their are underlying motives here! When the evidence, that hasn't been destroyed and can still be seen still doesn't seem to add up, what is the next thing to consider? Motive.

reply to post by percievedreality


Really interesting, please provide some back up for it. I know about the SEC - Enron - angle. I remember the "lost" trillion LOL - yeah sure - maybe it went to Lear's alleged secret space program. Please where is there more information about the accountants at the Pentagon?

The information is out there for those who wish to search for it...here is a partial list of Army personnel. The fatalities were tallied to be 184 not 189 as I said before, my bad.

Pentagon Personnel who died in/at Pentagon...

(Most appear to be working on budget analyst, auditors, ACCOUNTANTS)
killtown.911review.org...

Karl W. Teepe, Centreville, Virginia, LTC Army Ret. Budget analyst, Army Defense Intelligency Agency.
Angelene C. Carter, 51, Forrestville, Maryland, accountant, U.S. Army
Sharon Carver, 38, Waldorf, Maryland, accountant, U.S. Army ,
Ada Davis, 57, Camp Springs, Maryland accountant, U.S. Army
Cortz Ghee, 54, Reisterstown, Maryland, budget analyst, U.S. Army ,
Brenda C. Gibson, 59, Falls Church, Virginia budgeting and accounting, U.S. Army ,
Carolyn B. Halmon, 49, Washington, D.C. budget analyst, U.S. Army ,
Jimmie Ira Holley, 54, Lanham, Maryland accountant ,
Peggie Hurt, 36, Crewe, Virginia accountant, U.S. Army ,
Carrie Blagburn, 48, Temple Hills, Maryland, civilian budget analyst, U.S. Army ,
Martha Reszke, 36, Stafford, Virginia budget analyst, U.S. Army ,
Brenda Kegler, 49, Washington, D.C. budget analyst, U.S. Army ,
David W. Laychak, 40, Manassas, Virginia civilian budget analyst, U.S. Army ,
Samantha Lightbourn-Allen, 36, Hillside, Maryland budget analyst, U.S. Army ,
Shelley A. Marshall, 37, Marbury, Maryland budget analyst, Defense Intelligence Agency ,
Molly McKenzie, 38, Dale City, Virginia budget analyst, U.S. Army
Edna L. Stephens, 53, Washington, D.C.budget analyst, U.S. Army
Patricia E. (Patti) Mickley, 41, Springfield, Virginia financial manager, Defense Department ,
Robert E. Russell, 52, Oxon Hill, Maryland civilian budgetary supervisor, U.S. Army ,
Antoinette Sherman, 35, Forest Heights, Maryland budget analyst, U.S. Army,
Odessa V. Morris, 54, Upper Marlboro, Maryland budget analyst, U.S. Army ,
Ted Moy, 48, Silver Spring, Maryland program manager, U.S. Army ,
Diana B. Padro, 55, Woodbridge, Virginia accountant, U.S. Army ,
Cecelia E. Richard, 41, Fort Washington, Maryland accounting technician, U.S. Army ,
Edward V. Rowenhorst, 32, Lake Ridge, Virginia civilian accountant, U.S. Army ,
Judy Rowlett, 44, Woodbridge, Virginia civilian employee, U.S. Army

The majority of the rest of the fatalities were Navy personnel who were most likely involved in the multiple war game scenarios being played out that morning but had never realized they were reality and not an exercise, with the exception of one man (Capt. Gerald Francis Deconto) who tried to call superiors to get authorization to engage whatever was heading for the Pentagon that day. Cover up.....right from the start.



[Mod Edit - ad quote tags and source]

If you post something that is not 100% your own writing or work you must use the QUOTE BOX TAG, post NO MORE THAN 15% of the original (or three paragraphs, whichever is least), and GIVE A LINK TO THE SOURCE MATERIAL. If the work you are posting is not on the internet, from a book for example, you MUST give a credit for that Book ( the title), its Author and Publisher.
Sauron ATS Moderator

[edit on 19/2/2008 by Sauron]

This argument is absurd. Anyone with common sense can see it was a controlled demolition.
Show me one example, outside of NYC on 9/11, where this kind of global collapse has occurred without the aid of explosives.
You are in denial (or worse) if you cant see that this was a CD. It is an insult to any sane person's intellect to argue otherwise. Period. End of debate.

Regardless...
Non urinat in ventum.

reply to post by Smack



You know what I think of your response? I agree 100%!! I feel that over and over people have shown bleak arguments when it comes to supporting the official story and WTC7. Again we have a failure on this post to prove that it was anything other than CD.

This is probably why we are not seeing a lot of the other side on here.

Originally posted by Jeff Riff
reply to post by Smack

 

You know what I think of your response? I agree 100%!! I feel that over and over people have shown bleak arguments when it comes to supporting the official story and WTC7. Again we have a failure on this post to prove that it was anything other than CD.

This is probably why we are not seeing a lot of the other side on here.

This is only the beginning my friends. These debunkers are realizing that their efforts were by no means a failure but it's futility has become most apparent.

The sad thing is that they only had to cover 911 for 8 years after that we can yell at cheney and bush as they live in South AMerica far removed from the mess of the civilization that they once ruled/ruined.

Please show us in history where a steel framed building has globally collapsed due to this condition.

MCCormack Place in Chicago (1967) - considered classic example
of fire induced collapse

A janitor noticed smoke coming from the back of a booth about 2:05 a.m. Within 5 minutes the entire booth was involved and the fire department called at 2:11 a.m. The fire department responded rapidly, entering the building and ordering a second alarm at 2:16 a.m. Nine alarms were struck, bringing 500 persons and 94 pieces of fire equipment. Initial attempts to fight the fire were frustrated by an almost immediate failure of the water supply. By 2:53 a.m. firefighters were able to establish a relay from hydrants 1/4 mile away and the first fire boat arrived, but by then the whole building was involved in the fire and the roof had started collapsing. The fire was struck out at 9:46 a.m. with only parts of the lower level and the theater undamaged.

A number of factors contributed to the catastrophe. Most of these would have been sufficient by themselves to cause great destruction. The 1,250 exhibits were constructed of highly flammable wood, paper and plastic. The temporary wiring used to rig exhibits was often not up to the building code. 92% of the building, including the exhibition hall, did not have sprinklers. The water supply failed almost immediately upon the firefighters' arrival. McCormick Place's private hydrants were closed and never reopened after construction on the Stevenson Expressway, and the private pumping system was defective and inadequate. The fire spread was very rapid due to the lack of compartmentalization, the large amount of fuel, and lack of means of suppression. The unprotected steel roof trusses failed early on in the fire due to the same factors.

Heavy fire load, no water to fight fire.

www.chipublib.org...

Extensive review of major fires

books.google.com... iEgR2MZgM

Also Vincent Dunn "THE COLLAPSE OF BURNING BUILDINGS"

www.amazon.com...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1203470069&sr=1-1
All these in intact buildings which unlike WTC 7 did not suffer extensive
structural damage.

reply to post by thedman


If you can't tell the difference between your examples and WTC 7 you are not looking hard enough. None of those buildings globally collapsed.

At McCormick Place the ROOF collapsed, not a global collapse. It also didn't collapse with no sign of resistance. It also wasn't anywhere near the kind of building WTC 7 was. But of course we can't use the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building as a good example of a building with asymmetrically damage still being held up by one column.

The second one shows nothing that's relevant to WTC7. If you think there is something then please be specific. I'm not going through a whole website to try to figure out what you're referring to.

A link to a book about buildings collapsing also doesn't help unless we can read the book. But I'll bet you there is no incident in that book that is similar to the collapse of WTC 7. If there is one please be more specific.

Or is it you're trying to say that building do collapse from fire? If so no one is doubting that. It's just that buildings on fire don't collapse globally and neatly into their own footprints with no sign of resistance, and so far all steel framed buildings have survived fires without collapsing. Not all building are steel framed. Many are wood framed and collapse fairly easily in fires. You can't just show us any old building that was on fire and think it proves anything about WTC 7.

You think all collapses are the same? I'm just trying to figure out your thinking and why you can't see the fundamental mistakes in your logic.

All these in intact buildings which unlike WTC 7 did not suffer extensive structural damage.

Yes, and none of them, made from steel, globally collapsed with no sign of resistance. Even wood framed building don't globally collapse in fires.
A building on fire doesn't heat up equally to allow all load bearing sections to fail at the same time. But you can believe what you want mate...

Edit; atrocious grammar...

[edit on 19/2/2008 by ANOK]

Or is it you're trying to say that building do collapse from fire? If so no one is doubting that. It's just that buildings on fire don't collapse globally and neatly into their own footprints with no sign of resistance, and so far all steel framed buildings have survived fires without collapsing. Not all building are steel framed. Many are wood framed and collapse fairly easily in fires. You can't just show us any old building that was on fire and think it proves anything about WTC 7.

Geez have to remember that on the fireground considering seen a
steel framed building collapse during a fire in its own footprint.

query.nytimes.com...

Gravity will pull a building down in a vertical direction whether collapse
was deliberate demolition or accidental. So unless there is a strong lateral
force acting on it the building will fall in pile centered on its footprint.

Hmmm none of the debunkers want to touch dr jones.

Because they can't debunk him.

wtc debris dust 100% match for thermate signature by spectrograph analysis

see above video

reply to post by thedman


Are there pictures of this global collapse? I'm interested to see what the columns look like. Thanks.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence and I'm not dedicated for or against CD, I just need the irrefutable proof either way and that hasn't been forthcoming. Even Dr Jones is struggling to find absolute proof of anything to support his position that doesn't fit more mundane processes (eg iron-rich microspheres and possible 'thermite chips' etc).

I'm not holding onto much hope for a final NIST report on it to resolve the issues either.