Then why did WTC 7 fall?

Its the first steel structure to collapse. The owner of the building said they 'pulled' it, whatever the hell that means. Looks like controlled demolitions to me.

Thats another scene I would have loved somebody here to explain:rolleyes: .

#7 felll exactly the same way 3 of our casino`s did when they emploded them. Im not an engineer though.

I really don't know much about the WTC itself. When was it built?

It was on my list of must-sees back when I was planning an US east-coast vacation... :(

Probably slightly more reinforced conc than steel high-rises here these days, at least in CA. Steel is so expensive now though. Obviously that impacts reinf conc construction as well but less so. Not sure about Australia, but I believe in NZ steel highrises have been unheard of since the early ‘80s due to steelworkers unions ‘difficult’ demands.

Steel is the worst-performing structural material in fires. Worse than wood which a lot of people can’t believe. Steel fails very suddenly whereas wood chars, forming its own protective insulating layer around the sound material inside. Of course we can’t make high rises out of wood ;) Of course steel structure is protected in building construction. The goal is to isolate it from heat buildup through a sprayed on coating, or wrapping in cementitious type board. Such wrapping wouldn’t have much resistance to impact & I would think could be fairly easily compromised by flying debris.

Like its been said, no building is designed with such an impact in mind. To do that would, IMO be prohibitively expensive

amazing the things you can find at the click of a button. Viola! It was made of steel. It doesn't take a structural engineer to know that if you superheat metal, it will fail. It only takes one floor to fail and then momentum does the rest. Explosions could have been any number of things. FAA snoops can figure out what kind of plane it was from basically a pile of ash. http://www.skyscraper.org/TALLEST_TOWERS/t_wtc.htm

Thanks for the link!

Opened April 4th, 1973.

You ever see how that is done? They gut lower levels of the building, expose the critical support beams, install shaped charges at an angle so that the beams shear diagonally. Then they string the whole place with primercord, which is itself explosive, which makes sure the cutting charges go off in unison. They they plug in a bunch of blasting caps, to trigger the charges, and string a few miles of wire to trigger the blasting caps so all the charges go off either at once, or in a specific sequence required to bring down a specific structure. The setup takes weeks, and is fairly destructive.

7 WTC collapsed on Sep 11. It is not very likely that the preparations could have been done in advance without anyone noticing.

The quote from the owner of the building: If you are not a tinfoil-hat-wearing moron, this means: stop fighting the fires. If you are a tinfoil-hat-wearing moron, this means send the guys with explosives into the burning building that has tanks with 42,000 gallons of Diesel fuel.:rolleyes:

As one of the first responders to this inane post, I had to ask myself where I wanted it to go. At first I figured this was a new guy that didn't know any better and brought this **** up for the millionth time. Then I looked at 911S's signature and realized I used to see him around under his old name, so he HAS been around a while.

I have looked at several of those fancy pantsy BS videos about how no plane hit the Pentagon. **** it, I was there, I KNOW better. I don't know much else about aluminum melting, airling fule burning or any of that. I do know the Pentagon is a ****ing huge stone building. You can't even comprehend how big it is unless you see it in person. The whole ****ing thing is made of concrete and stone. Real strong. I have been in the Pentagon. Worked there over a year. I know how big and how strong it is. I watched them tear down literally 10x what was damaged in the plane crash over the following weeks and rebuild it. Hundreds of man hours.

Where am I going with this? Were you there? Have you ever seen it? I was. The don't make them like this any more kids. Look at the car wreck thread from RCM's daughter. (sorry for the reference man!) 80mph. Not a lot of ****ing metal left, huh? All that car hit was a small rock wall. Cars are designed to take some impact. A plane is designed to fly. No 5mph bumpers, baby. See the Top Gear from about a month ago? 2 cars crash at 60mph. Not a lot left there either. Add a ****ing ****load of fuel to a plane and crash is. Gone.

But yet 911s has to come here and keep thrusting up this video. Which is 50 min. Which is on a server that has exceeded its bandwith for the day (So I'm told, I didnt try). Keeps saying "why" "debunk" etc. Dude, make it easier on us. What are the issues you want debunked. So many people recale, isalnd911, sebring, ubiquity have already debunked questions you haven't asked. Cite your specific concerns and it will be addressed by someone.

Before you get all high and mighty, 911S, and rip me a new one for not answering your bull**** post, I will concede this. I like this forum and spend too much of my time in here reading the nonsense that goes on. I like to solicit opinions from everything to lawnmowers, to the idiot contractors in my neighborhood, so some non-sensiscal article I found. I like throwing an idea out and seeing what ideas come back (domestic spies). (Guess I won't be doing this any more :) But, I do not come here after three years and INTENTIONALLY start in with something I know is guaranteed to generate a 4 page post in hours by constantly feeding the flames with "why" "debunk" "conpiracy", etc. Do some ****ing research. I'm as lazy as the next guy using the search, but I try to figure out which way the wind is blowing before I piss in it.

Re-read my comments in the other thread. There was a plane. A big white or silver plane. It crashed. Nearby. I saw the wreckage. Just because I didn't see a blow by blow on TV doesn't mean it didn't happen.

\

Surprisingly enough, yes, I know how they do it.

Thats one of the issues I was looking to be debunked. The way they showed #7 falling in the video, looked EXACTLY how the Dunes came down here in Vegas.

Ya, for what ever reason, I tried to get my password emailed to me, but couldnt, so I couldnt log in under my old name.

This is why I posed the question of debunking the the stuff they were showing in this video. People who were actualy there.

True, and I understand that. Im not saying there WAS Not a plane, just trying to understand the video`s theories, and some of the issues that were brought up.

When I posted the link, it was NOT down.(or else I wouldnt have placed it).It will be up tonight. I wasent thrusting up this video.I just wanted the facts (their facts) that they were giving out, to be debunk by people here who would actualy know if it was real, or full of doo. I was going to let the video speak for itself, but.,.,.,.,

I dont remember all of the issues, but some were,

"For the amount of fuel the plane had, the fire damage should have been more severe then what the pictures show.They showed the exposed floors after the roof fell, and it showed no signs of fire, when they should have, for the amount of fuel it had, and for the size of the explosion"

" They show the roof still standing after a 757 slams into it. But they show a 14, to 16 foot hole in the building, where its said the plane hit. They give measurments of the planes wingspan, and tail hight, and ask how can something this big, make such a small hole.Also, they show the wire spools that are laying on the ground in front of the building, that should have been dragged into the building, if the plane was flying so low."

" They question why there is only 5 pictures, from a camera, that does not show a plan flying into the building, just the explosion. WHere is all the video from other survalience camera`s. WHy did they seize video for a gas station, and other buisnesses around area. Where is all the video from the Pentagon its self. They say, that every inch of that building is video taped 24/7"

" They bring up the missing plane. On this issue, I get conflicting coments on this. If the plane disinagrated on inpact, why are there claims parts were found in and around the building ? AND, if there were parts around and in the building, how did they survive if they should have disinagrated from the intence heat ?"

" The video claims that there was something on the bottom of the of the second plane before it hit the tower.With that, they also show a small explosion BEFORE the cockpit hit the building. They showed 4 different camera views."

It goes on and on, sorry tired .

High and mighty ?Ive NEVER acted in that fasion on this board, or any where else for that matter. Im not better then anybody else.No reason to rip you either. You and me both spend too much time here:D Intentionaly ? I didnt intentionaly star anything. I came and posed a question of this video. I was flammed for it. I didnt think it would have turned out to be this 4 page slug fest.Wasent trying to start the flames. Why ask why. I was always told there are no stupid questions, and I felt, I had questions about what was being said, and shown on this video. I did a search, and didnt find anything pertaining to THIS video. Im not the type to pusyfoot around, figuring out who to, and not to piss off. I have questions, I want answers. If people get pissed off, sorry, but I would like to be informed, and have understanding of issues I dont have a clue about. If thats pissing in the wind, so be it.

I, MYSELF am not questioning the plane issue( they are).

I think your missing a few key words. ( ITS BEING REPORTED IN THIS VIDEO) . I didnt say I know, or thought there was no plane.Nor did I say it wasent an american airlines plane. I said what was being said by them on the video.

Thats funny. I was never defending the video`s argument. I was pushing for somebody to debunk the video`s message.

Your really reaching with this one.

Why should I explain where the planes went, when I watched them fly into the building live ? The missing planes part means, it doesnt bother me that they say that. I never said the video had credibility. Im here asking about its credibility.

Why am I ignoring the cell phone calls ? When did I mention that, or say the video did or didnt say that ? Keep reaching.

Stay with the subject in hand.

No, I said I watched 2 planes fly into the towers live. I have no clue to which planes hit, besides from news sources. I didnt see what was printed on the side or on the tail of the planes. And it was somebody who call in on a taped radio show that said it was a cargo type plain. The video just mearly points that out. The big issue with the planes is what on the belly of the second plane, and what are fire flashes in the building before the plane hits. Are you sure you watched THIS video ? The credibily Im asking about are the issues I just mentioned. Thats why i said watch this video.

Damn!!! Looks like the only thing we're gonna "debunk" here is the 911S Targa/911SC Pilot issue. BO-RING!!!!!

Randy

911S Targa:

I think you are really missing the point here. The video makers opinions are just not feasible when given the constant- There were four planes that disappeared on 9-11. All of the people from those planes were never seen again (because they were murdered by religious fanatics). None of the planes themselves were ever seen again (because they crashed). Now, you take that constant, along with a just a little common sense (heck even see for yourself in the videos of the Towers being crashed into) and you have to know the video's theories just are not tenable. You can play with the dependant variables all day (jet fuel amounts, tiny explosions, lack of debris, patterns of fires, manners of collapse, spaceships nearby, little green army men, dogs that talk, men in black, WHATEVER), but you can't change the independant variable:

4 different commericial airliners+People board the 4 different planes+4 planes take off+all of the people who boarded the planes never seen again+the planes themselves gone= the planes crashed somewhere.

OK, now here me out here. If the planes crashed, which we will have to take as true since I don't think that many different people could dissapear on the same day, the same way (and please ask yourself why would they), then where did they crash if they didn't crash into the WTC 1 and 2, the Pentagon and Shanksville, PA????????????????????????

If you would just admit the independant variable as true and please help me if I am off base here, there is no need to discuss the debunking the videos theories in the equation because they are not tenable when considering the independant variable. You see, you can't get there from here.

Please be rational here. I appreciate people asking questions about everything. Without questions we would not be the evolved society we are. But, when the questions approach the ridiculous or non-sensical it is a bit much. 911STarga I have looked at some of your posts (and your previous life too) and think you are intelligent, please use some of that native intelligence to figure out the rational, reasonable and scientific response to the video.

Signed,

Rational People

You must not watched this video yet, to grasp the questions i was asking.

No worries, typical.

I`ll give and throw the idiot towel, you win.

how the hell is anyone supposed to "watched this video yet, to grasp the questions" when the site has been TU .. .dead, for the last few days?

Geez man, we know sc-pilot has been on this board for some time, but I'm wondering who "911S targa" really is. (other than a troll)

They video was suppost to back up today, so the site claimed yesterday. Now its up, but now you cant click on the "911 In Plane Site" link. Just the other four, of which I didnt watch.

I am sc-pilot, Im sure Wayne can verify that with my IP`s. Troll, nope.

But Ive already called defeat u allwin, I lose. I look like an idiot, and ill live with that.

FBI must have shut down the video link.

LOL :D