More Footage of WTC 7 on fire 9/11

That footage was proof for what? A fire in one office window will bring down a 47 story skyscraper

In order for the building to collapse as it did all of the support columns had to be severed at the exact same moment.

Building 7 fell at free fall speed for approx 2.25 seconds. Zero resistance for over 2 seconds. Think about that zero resistance symetrical collapse hmmmmmm ....all of those huge columns of steel suddenly missing.

Originally posted by waypastvne
Now point me to the one that scientifically explains the slow pull in of the east wall using demolitions. How did they do it.

First you have to prove that actually happened. Just because that's what NIST claimed it doesn't make it fact.

If you look close at the facade you can see the bowing is nothing but the aluminum facade warping...



Saying that is sagging trusses puling in columns is an assumption, not based on physics.

A sagging truss can not also create a pulling force.

Originally posted by ANOK

That is defiantly 100%, beyond any shadow of a doubt, unmistakably, exterior columns being pulled in to the point where a buckling compression failure will occur.

To say otherwise makes you a very entertaining Truther.

Exactly how much room did the aluminum cladding have to move around and deform ?

A sagging truss can not also create a pulling force.

This statement is also very very entertaining. Please elaborate.

Perfectly symmetrical collapse and yet some people still yell 'fire'.

Originally posted by Leo Strauss


In order for the building to collapse as it did all of the support columns had to be severed at the exact same moment.

You are telling us, that if you severed all of the columns at once, the penthouse would fall first wile the rest of the building hovered, then 6 seconds later the rest of the building would fall ? Is this what you're trying to tell us ?

Originally posted by WeMoveUnseen
Perfectly symmetrical collapse and yet some people still yell 'fire'.

+1

Originally posted by WeMoveUnseen
Perfectly symmetrical collapse and yet some people still yell 'fire'.

There was no perfect symmetry to it. The building was collapsing internally for like 10 seconds before the exterior granite facade came down.

Originally posted by Varemia
There was no perfect symmetry to it. The building was collapsing internally for like 10 seconds before the exterior granite facade came down.

Did you miss a lot of school for some reason?

symmetrical
[si-me-tri-kuhl]  
sym·met·ri·cal
   [si-me-tri-kuhl] Show IPA
adjective
1.
characterized by or exhibiting symmetry; well-proportioned, as a body or whole; regular in form or arrangement of corresponding parts.

dictionary.reference.com...

Even though you have no evidence for this ten seconds, it completely misses the point. All four corners of the towers fell at the same rate, that is what it means. It shows there was no resistance from any one side. If one sides connections took longer to fail than another, there would be instant tipping of the mass towards the path of least resistance.

Even the debris field was symmetrical...

Originally posted by Varemia

There was no perfect symmetry to it. The building was collapsing internally for like 10 seconds before the exterior granite facade came down.

Exactly how a large building of that shape and build would be demo'd.

Originally posted by ATH911

Originally posted by Varemia

There was no perfect symmetry to it. The building was collapsing internally for like 10 seconds before the exterior granite facade came down.

Exactly how a large building of that shape and build would be demo'd.

I've never seen a demolition do that before. All demolitions I've seen involve the entire building coming down instantaneously. Otherwise, there is a danger of charges not firing correctly and such. Why wasn't any evidence of explosive charges ever found?

reply to post by ANOK


I was referring to building 7. The towers weren't symmetrical because you can tell that the debris is simply pummeling its way down. It only appears quasi-symmetrical if you don't think about what's going on inside. In-fact, the only way to consider demolition is purely through imagination, and I know of no-one who has ever demolished a building during a collapse. It's ridiculous. The charges could not be guaranteed to go off correctly, and there would be evidence later.