|
Post by gwiz on Dec 13, 2005 5:52:28 GMT -4
Nice piece of research, redd. Turbonium, this is now untenable: No compression or "piston" effect is in play here.
|
|
|
Post by redd on Dec 13, 2005 6:05:12 GMT -4
thanks gwiz
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Dec 13, 2005 6:44:42 GMT -4
I've been trying to point this out for months, they won't listen. But yes you are exactly right redd, the internal structures of WTC 7 fell first, and the facade came a tumbling after. The images couldn't be more clear if they had arrows, yet time and time again the CT's ignore the first images showing the penthouses and only use the later ones without.
Welcome to the board, and best of luck and pateince, you're gunna need it.
|
|
|
Post by Tanalia on Dec 14, 2005 7:47:08 GMT -4
Above is a picture from the NIST draft WTC 7 report. wtc.nist.gov/pubs/WTC%20Part%20IIC%20-%20WTC%207%20Collapse%20Final.pdf(from pg 17) Below is a schematic of how NIST portrays the damage to the south face of WTC 7. Note the extent of damage to the southwest corner in the diagram. (pg 20 of the above report) Now note the alleged large gaping hole in the center of the south face, (which NIST tells us was done by falling debris from WTC 1). NIST tells us that there was a... "large debris hole near center around 14th floor". Looking at the photo above we can see the southwest corner damage. We know that; that damage extended to the 18th floor. (page 15 of the above report) The NIST-alleged massive center damage should clearly be visible in the above photo (allegedly being only 4 floors below the height of the southwest corner damage). Can you find the alleged damage which NIST indicates is in the center of the south face? The view in the photo is from roughly west-northwest. The south face of the building is around the back on the right side, so of course you can't see the gaping hole.
|
|
lenbrazil
Saturn
Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!
Posts: 1,045
|
Post by lenbrazil on Dec 14, 2005 11:05:29 GMT -4
Do any photos of the holes exist? Without them the CTists won't believe they existed
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Dec 14, 2005 21:56:04 GMT -4
Unfortunately I don't think anyone imaged the building from the south. It's one of those "drat I wish we had" things that happens with 20/20 hindsight. Of course even if they had, there'd be something else that the CT would claim because it wasn't done they way they would have done it.
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Dec 14, 2005 23:37:59 GMT -4
Unfortunately I don't think anyone imaged the building from the south.
So just take their word for it, holes were there? Sorry, I don't, and why should I or anyone else just accept that as fact without a shred of proof? Every other side of the building is intact, so even accepting that story, the damage would have been asymmetrical, and we know the building fell virtually straight down into it's own footprint. Are you claiming that you could duplicate this effect with another structure?
As for the "squibs", please explain how the building has collapsed enough to generate the sequential low-to-high squibs due to pressure. The WTC 7 video shows these squibs firing out before the building collapses, not during the collapse.
|
|
|
Post by PeterB on Dec 15, 2005 0:27:35 GMT -4
Boyle:...So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good... Then we received an order from Fellini, we’re going to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn’t look good. I was figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was no hydrant pressure. I wasn’t really keen on the idea. Then this other officer I’m standing next to said, that building doesn’t look straight. So I’m standing there. I’m looking at the building. It didn’t look right, but, well, we’ll go in, we’ll see. So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody’s going into 7, there’s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned. Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side? Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it. Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many? Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post... From www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/boyle.html
|
|
|
Post by wanker on Dec 15, 2005 3:35:36 GMT -4
Unfortunately I don't think anyone imaged the building from the south. So just take their word for it, holes were there? Sorry, I don't, and why should I or anyone else just accept that as fact without a shred of proof? Every other side of the building is intact, so even accepting that story, the damage would have been asymmetrical, and we know the building fell virtually straight down into it's own footprint. Are you claiming that you could duplicate this effect with another structure? As for the "squibs", please explain how the building has collapsed enough to generate the sequential low-to-high squibs due to pressure. The WTC 7 video shows these squibs firing out before the building collapses, not during the collapse. don't be such a wanker
|
|
|
Post by redd on Dec 15, 2005 4:19:12 GMT -4
turbonium,
I can see your mind is made up on this subject so why go on.
Just some advice, find a video that shows those squibs going from the bottom to the top before the collapse.....Not an animated gif, cropped down and pardon the phrase "enhanced". Animated gifs to me aren't reliable evidence.
|
|
lenbrazil
Saturn
Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!
Posts: 1,045
|
Post by lenbrazil on Dec 15, 2005 7:57:51 GMT -4
turbonium, I can see your mind is made up on this subject so why go on. Turbonium could just as fairly say that all of our minds are already made up on this subject, but I think he'll find it hard to counter the fireman's quote..
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Dec 15, 2005 23:50:59 GMT -4
There is testimony that contradicts the account you posted. The below link and excerpt from the FEMA report describes how the south face was only damaged at the southwest corner. "According to the account of a firefighter who walked the 9th floor along the south side following the collapse of WTC 1, the only damage to the 9th floor facade occurred at the southwest corner"www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf (page 5-20 of pdf file) This firefighter's account of the damage is not only visual but physical, since he actually walked inside WTC 7 along the south face. His testimony provides for a more accurate description than Boyle, who only describes what he saw from outside the building. As well, Boyle does not make any mention of the damage to the southwest corner. That may also mean that he was actually describing the southwest corner damage and mistook it's location as the center of the south face. And as already mentioned, there are no videos or photographs showing any damage to the south face alone.
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Dec 15, 2005 23:51:42 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Dec 16, 2005 0:10:46 GMT -4
Just some advice, find a video that shows those squibs going from the bottom to the top before the collapse.....Not an animated gif, cropped down and pardon the phrase "enhanced" Here's a link of the same in an mpeg video. Go to "Videos of Building 7's Collapse". It's the first video in the section. 911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/videos/
|
|
|
Post by PeterB on Dec 16, 2005 0:28:29 GMT -4
Turbonium said:
That's true. Then read the next sentences:
|
|