Building 7 and the Pentagon - a few questions

[Blue]

Okay. I know I know...anybody who questions the official story of 9/11 is a tinfoil hat wearing, unpatriotic lunatic. Buuuut I got a few questions.

1. How did the third building(Building 7), which had no major structural damage, fall like a vegas strip casino? Why did they demolish it and why was there not alot of coverage of it?

2. How come no video of a plane hitting The Pentagon? They have to have cameras around there.

3. Why no debris in Pennsylvania and the Pentagon? You're telling me it all disintegrated too? No tail, no engine? Now I know its not going to look like the opening scene from LOST, but every pic or video Ive ever seen from a plane crash had a crapload of debris. Yet The Pentagon looks like a missle went through it.

These are just a few questions I still have. please explain and it will settle some doubts about 9-11 I have.

I believe the questions are legit. :pop:

[Blue]

_kSq663m0G8

One down. two to go.

[yermom]

i've heard rumblings about them shooting United 93 down and cleaned up the wreckage to hide that from the public

i've seen explanations about the Pentagon being hit by a plane though.

[yankee]

Okay. I know I know...anybody who questions the official story of 9/11 is a tinfoil hat wearing, unpatriotic lunatic. Buuuut I got a few questions.

1. How did the third building(Building 7), which had no major structural damage, fall like a vegas strip casino? Why did they demolish it and why was there not alot of coverage of it?

2. How come no video of a plane hitting The Pentagon? They have to have cameras around there.

3. Why no debris in Pennsylvania and the Pentagon? You're telling me it all disintegrated too? No tail, no engine? Now I know its not going to look like the opening scene from LOST, but every pic or video Ive ever seen from a plane crash had a crapload of debris. Yet The Pentagon looks like a missle went through it.

These are just a few questions I still have. please explain and it will settle some doubts about 9-11 I have.

I believe the questions are legit. :pop:

All the proof I need for the Pentagon crash: 64 people got on a plane that morning and never got to see their families again.

[Blue]

All the proof I need for the Pentagon crash: 64 people got on a plane that morning and never got to see their families again.

Hmmm.

[yankee]

Hmmm.

I'm not trying to sound like a dick, I just wanna further what I said...For the people who think that a missile, not a plane struck the Pentagon..how did the Gov't make 64 people disappear? What about the families of the victims? Duped this whole time? Yeah OK...

[Blue]

I'm not trying to sound like a dick, I just wanna further what I said...For the people who think that a missile, not a plane struck the Pentagon..how did the Gov't make 64 people disappear? What about the families of the victims? Duped this whole time? Yeah OK...

Nah man. I didn't have a problem with your answer.

[KABOOKIE]

With something crashes at 600 knots, there is not much left of it but small pieces. Everything is pulverized in the crash.

In 1991 a 737 lost rudder control and plunged straight into the ground into a Colorado Springs park killing 25 people. When people in the neighborhood responded to the noise they thought a small Cessna 172 had crashed because there was very little debris and no sign of victims. In fact there was so little recognizable debris that the NTSB was unable to positively identify what caused the accident until a second 737 lost rudder control and crashed a few months later.

[texaspokieokie]

Hmmm.

Check with rosie o donnell, she's a structural engineer & has all the answers.

[Turd_Ferguson]

Check with rosie o donnell, she's a structural engineer & has all the answers.Heh. "Whoever heard of fire melting steel"...:D

[Soonerwake]

Cuz, the plane took down the building "demolition style"... :D

[Ike]

Regarding debris, remember that in a 'normal' crash, the pilots will generally take every possible measure to either avoid a crash, or to lessen it's impact. That was not true in this case. So the idea that the size of individual pieces of debris (like a mostly intact tail for instance) should be expected seems to be a bit of a fallacy.

[sappstuf]

Okay. I know I know...anybody who questions the official story of 9/11 is a tinfoil hat wearing, unpatriotic lunatic. Buuuut I got a few questions.

1. How did the third building(Building 7), which had no major structural damage, fall like a vegas strip casino? Why did they demolish it and why was there not alot of coverage of it?

2. How come no video of a plane hitting The Pentagon? They have to have cameras around there.

3. Why no debris in Pennsylvania and the Pentagon? You're telling me it all disintegrated too? No tail, no engine? Now I know its not going to look like the opening scene from LOST, but every pic or video Ive ever seen from a plane crash had a crapload of debris. Yet The Pentagon looks like a missle went through it.

These are just a few questions I still have. please explain and it will settle some doubts about 9-11 I have.

I believe the questions are legit. :pop:

Who says that it didn't?

Why don't you just read the government report? It is actually pretty easy reading and has photos to show what they are talking about.

http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/appendixl.pdf

Page L-17 talks about the damage it sustained from the collapse of the towers and then go from there.

[KantoSooner]

How about this:

Assume the whole thing was a set up. Assume Bush and Co. (or 'The CIA' or 'The Illuminati', 'The Gnomes of Zurich' or 'The Elders of Zion' or 'The Bevo Club of Greater Pasaic, NJ', whoever) arranged the whole thing, for whatever obscure reason.

Now, you have to also grant that, for ten years and running (ignoring the time it took in planning, set up and execution) a fraud of massive proportions, something that would have taken hundreds of people to carry out, has been perfectly covered. Not one person has broken. Not one guy has gotten drunk and talked to a hooker. Nothing.

And this from a government that can't keep GNP numbers secret overnight?

The concept of Ockham's razor states, basically, that the simplest possible explanation for a given event should be assumed, in the absence of strong evidence to the contrary.

Can I accept the existance of nut-job muslims? In the US? Taking flight school? Then hijacking planes (4) and flying them into buildings?

Yes. It's more logical than assuming a massive deceit and successful coverup by at least two and possibly three administrations (from different parties).

To credit the contrary, one has to jump into the deep end of epistomology and stop with the cogito. Because, frankly, at some point, we can not 'prove' that we exist beyond stating that we appear to be some form of thinking entity. Beyond that, we have to start taking things on basis of best judgement.

[XingTheRubicon]

Ockham's razor

3 multi-story steel buildings have collapsed due to fire in the history of Earth. The twin towers and building 7.


*bldg 7 due to debris from towers

[OUDoc]

3 multi-story steel buildings have collapsed due to fire in the history of Earth. The twin towers and building 7.


*bldg 7 due to debris from towers

I don't know if what you say is a fact or not but there wasn't just a typical building fire involved with the collapse.

[jkjsooner]

As for the Pentagon, there is a documentary that has been running recently about "9/11 in DC" and in the documentary you can clearly see a piece of metal with the letter "A" for American.

Not that this will convince anyone but my wife knows people who saw the plane fly directly over head and you don't have to spend much time in Arlington to run into people who were on the highways at that time and saw it happen.

This post is good timing as I was about to post something on this topic. My wife knows a person who died in the WTC. She was doing a search on his name and discovered his name all throughout the 9/11 conspiracy sites. Apparently this guy never existed. In fact, the WTC was completely empty of all people and furniture at the time the missiles (not planes) hit it.

Just about any time the govt does something there are leaks. The only thing officially released before Sunday night was that the President was going to speak but of course every news outlet knew wha the topic was about because it had been leaked. There were relatively few people involved yet it can't be kept secret yet hundreds of thousands of people were involved in a 9/11 conspiracy....

[2121Sooner]

I find it hilarious that a majority of people at the end of Bush's term thought he was a complete idiot. Yet strangely he has the capacity to pull something like this off.

Read the following link or find the video and quit being a complete idiot.

With all due respect
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/1227842

[Tulsa_Fireman]

3 multi-story steel buildings have collapsed due to fire in the history of Earth. The twin towers and building 7.


*bldg 7 due to debris from towers

This is incorrect. It may be just a matter of semantics, but there's been multi-story steel monolithic frame buildings right here in beautiful Tulsa that have collapsed due to fire.

Collapsing high rise buildings are a different "story".

Get it? Story? Har har har.

It's easy to disregard or ignore steel expansion ratios and tensile strength changes due to heat application. Below is a beautiful example of the effect of fire on monolithic steel structural members.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v699/xu-an/woodbeam_fire_bentsteel.jpg

The old fireground rule of thumb is a steel member will expand 12 inches per 100 foot at 1000 degrees fahrenheit. It is this very principle that establishes that one can expect full structural failure of steel joist construction in 5-10 minutes with direct flame impingement. With this expansion rate PLUS the loss of tensile strength, one can expect similar results with monolithic beams as well with sufficient live or dead loads and no passive fire protection systems (asbestos coatings, protected spaces, et cetera).

So it's NOT that the steel melts or softens so much as it expands and deforms, removing the engineered strength found in its inherent design (by twisting laterally to the plane of support as seen in the picture) and placing unintended, non-engineered stresses LATERALLY on the vertical load bearing pinnings, supports, and purlins. This I've seen firsthand. It is a very real, very dangerous scenario. Case in point, for those of you from the Tulsa area, you may remember the pool and hot tub sales place on S. 61st St. just east of Garnett that burned a few years back. Or the truck supply warehouse out in east Tulsa (3rd and 130th EA? Around in there somewhere). In both cases, simple room and contents fires caused massive deformation of primary structural members to the point of impending collapse wholly due to heat expansion and tensile strength changes.

It's an eerie situation to be in to actually see a 24" red iron I-beam twist nearly 90 degrees as it glows an angry red. And it gives all the evidence you need to understand how fire can affect unprotected steel structural members.

[MR2-Sooner86]

Most 9/11 Truthers are anti-Bush anti-war idiots who have no idea what they're talking about. There are a few who are very anti-government and don't have a political slant as they distrust both parties. I know I'm friends with both of them.

However, what I don't like is how must "patriotic" Americans will attack you for just asking questions. Since when in this country was it a bad thing to ask questions? Are you just suppose to take what the government gives you? Do I need to show, again, how our government has lied over the years?
The Gulf of Tonkin?
Operation Mockingbird?
The Tuskegee Syphilis Study?
The 1990 Testimony of Nayirah?
Rex 84?
The Iran-Contra Affair?
CIA Drug Running?
Operation Ajax?
Church Committee?

To say the government is above these sorts of actions is laughable, see Waco, but to blindly say the government is responsible is laughable as well.

The people who will call you a "tin foil hat wearing loon" or a "crazy conspiracy theorist" usually are lacking in critical thinking skills. I say something non-human crashed in Roswell yet they'll say I'm crazy. I'll ask why I'm crazy and they'll tell me the government said I'm crazy and to trust them.

I mean we the know the government is always honest with the best intentions for us, see Obamacare or '03 Iraq invasion, but to have them as this boogyman always out to get us is absurd. The government has lied to it's people over many bad things. However, this doesn't mean they're all bad and they all lie all the time.

To blindly trust somebody without using logic or knowledge is unhealthy.
To blindly mistrust somebody without using logic or knowledge is unhealthy.

Now, here's what I don't like about the 9/11 Truthers. They didn't come out until Loose Change was made. In case you didn't know, Loose Change is a film so accurate with it's predictions, the creators were too smart for film school and that's why they dropped out, it has only had to been re-edit at least three times.

I mean, who cares if in their first edition they claimed a missile bay was underneath one of the planes going into the WTC and that's how it was able to make such a nice hole and cause so much damage? They were just a little off on that but they were onto something.

I mean sure, there have been documates (http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html) made that really put a dent into their argument. However that didn't stop people at 911truth.org or loosechange911.com from continuing on for the quest for knowledge...or threaten to kill anybody who disagreed with them like Mark Roberts.

Speaking of evidence, here's a nice video of the WTC collapse. Does that look like an explosion or the building giving away under it's own weight. It seems a little fuzzy to me so hopefully you viewers at home can help decide.

fMibXJjx_DE&feature

[oudavid1]

Okay. I know I know...anybody who questions the official story of 9/11 is a tinfoil hat wearing, unpatriotic lunatic. Buuuut I got a few questions.

1. How did the third building(Building 7), which had no major structural damage, fall like a vegas strip casino? Why did they demolish it and why was there not alot of coverage of it?

2. How come no video of a plane hitting The Pentagon? They have to have cameras around there.

3. Why no debris in Pennsylvania and the Pentagon? You're telling me it all disintegrated too? No tail, no engine? Now I know its not going to look like the opening scene from LOST, but every pic or video Ive ever seen from a plane crash had a crapload of debris. Yet The Pentagon looks like a missle went through it.

These are just a few questions I still have. please explain and it will settle some doubts about 9-11 I have.

I believe the questions are legit. :pop:

ZaPoD_7TmNc

two down 8)

[TFSooner]

2. How come no video of a plane hitting The Pentagon? They have to have cameras around there.


There is video of the plane hitting the Pentagon from a surveillance camera, but surveillance cameras film at about one frame per second (or some such slow number compared to movie cameras that are around 60 frames per second). In that one second, a plane travelling at 400-500 knots travels between 675-850 feet. A Boeing 757 is 155 feet in length, so in that one second of video, the plane could travel four to five times its own length. The surveillance camera only caught the resulting explosion, not the plane itself.

Hardly a conspiracy, just math.

[oudavid1]

There is video of the plane hitting the Pentagon from a surveillance camera, but surveillance cameras film at about one frame per second (or some such slow number compared to movie cameras that are around 60 frames per second). In that one second, a plane travelling at 400-500 knots travels between 675-850 feet. A Boeing 757 is 155 feet in length, so in that one second of video, the plane could travel four to five times its own length. The surveillance camera only caught the resulting explosion, not the plane itself.

Hardly a conspiracy, just math.

It appears i wasnt here soon enough.

[TFSooner]

It appears i wasnt here soon enough.

You beat me with the video post. :)

[XingTheRubicon]

This is incorrect. It may be just a matter of semantics, but there's been multi-story steel monolithic frame buildings right here in beautiful Tulsa that have collapsed due to fire.

Collapsing high rise buildings are a different "story".
.

Yeah, a fire insulated red steel beam is a little different than steel stud shack.

and I don't think Bush masterminded some conspiracy, hell I like W, just a diffuse flame twisting steel so severely that it falls at 200 mph thru a steel building seems odd.

[oudavid1]

You beat me with the video post. :)

haha i get you!

[AlboSooner]

I think the building 7 conspiracy theory is the most legitimate one. Al-Qaeda brought down the twin towers, but building seven was not damaged enough to crumble like that.

I was living in NY at the time, and the rumor was it was brought down to collect the big insurance check, as with buildings like these insurance premiums go into the billions.

[jkjsooner]

I think the building 7 conspiracy theory is the most legitimate one. Al-Qaeda brought down the twin towers, but building seven was not damaged enough to crumble like that.

I was living in NY at the time, and the rumor was it was brought down to collect the big insurance check, as with buildings like these insurance premiums go into the billions.

So with a few hours of planning they were able to place explosions within building 7 and do a controlled demolition? You seriously think they could do all of that between the time the other towers collapsed and when building 7 collapsed?

Don't you think those in charge had a lot more to worry about in the minutes following the collapses than planning a scheme to defraud the insurance companies?

The only conceivable conspiracy theory in my eyes is that the fourth plane was shot down. I don't think it was but I'm hoping that they were prepared to shoot it down if necessary. Had they been forced to shoot it down I could imagine some would want to change the narrative a bit.

Had that happened it would have been leaked by now so I think the odds of that happening are slim to none but it's still a million times more coneivable than any other conspiracy theory surrounding 9/11.


Now all that said, you will never be able to convince me that Joel Henry Hinrichs was not intending on blowing himself up within Memorial Stadium. He used volatile chemicals and I believe they went off before he intended them to do so.

[Tulsa_Fireman]

Yeah, a fire insulated red steel beam is a little different than steel stud shack.

and I don't think Bush masterminded some conspiracy, hell I like W, just a diffuse flame twisting steel so severely that it falls at 200 mph thru a steel building seems odd.

It's not. Not in the least.

As you'll note in the rest of the post, we're not talking about "steel stud shacks". We're talking about Type I primary steel structural members, specifically red steel beams. It may be hard to comprehend. Lord knows when I first got into the business, when I first heard the stories, I dismissed it outright. There's no way a massive flying beam like that will do that. The scary thing is that they do. And when you introduce that volume of fire relative to the space without vent or fuel control, PLUS the impact, PLUS the heat release rate of the room contents (Ex. Polyurethane foam, AKA foam rubber, has an HRR around 2500 degrees F.), PLUS the lack of suppression efforts, it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when.

When these primary engineered structure supports fail, the result is cataclysmic. Especially in core constructed structures as each floor is rated to load to a certain level. If one part of the core fails or otherwise loses its ability to support its load, the floor below is now subject to the ENTIRE load above it which is, as would be obvious, WAY beyond its acceptable load. The problem daisychains from there with each following floor, just as it did with the towers. But it DOES require a perfect storm. That's why you haven't seen structural collapse in other high rise cases such as Tulsa's Petroleum Club fire, Biloxi's high rise tenement fire, and others. Concrete protected steel members, differing load points, a bunch of different factors that serve to preserve structural integrity.

Remember, you yourself mentioned the structural success rate of preserved building integrity post-fire. But speaking of the towers, how many high rise, core constructed spray coated steel buildings have had fully fueled passenger jets centerpunch them at speed? There's been two. Towers 1 and 2. And with an understanding of the construction method, the effects of direct flame impingement on steel, and fire behavior, the "why" begins to make some sense.

[AlboSooner]

So with a few hours of planning they were able to place explosions within building 7 and do a controlled demolition? You seriously think they could do all of that between the time the other towers collapsed and when building 7 collapsed?

The only conceivable conspiracy theory in my eyes is that the fourth plane was shot down. I don't think it was but I'm hoping that they were prepared to shoot it down if necessary. Had they been forced to shoot it down I could imagine some would want to change the narrative a bit.

Had that happened it would have been leaked by now so I think the odds of that happening are slim to none but it's still a million times more coneivable than any other conspiracy theory surrounding 9/11.

I still called it a conspiracy theory. Building 7 going down doesn't quite strike me as normal. People can do extraordinary things, and knowing how NY works, it's that not that unfathomable that the owners thought B7 was so marred in image that it would be best to collect that big paycheck.

I am not quite ready to dismiss B7: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8T2_nedORjw

[okie52]

http://i990.photobucket.com/albums/af24/okie54/leaning20tower20of20pisa.jpg

.

[JohnnyMack]

It's not. Not in the least.

As you'll note in the rest of the post, we're not talking about "steel stud shacks". We're talking about Type I primary steel structural members, specifically red steel beams. It may be hard to comprehend. Lord knows when I first got into the business, when I first heard the stories, I dismissed it outright. There's no way a massive flying beam like that will do that. The scary thing is that they do. And when you introduce that volume of fire relative to the space without vent or fuel control, PLUS the impact, PLUS the heat release rate of the room contents (Ex. Polyurethane foam, AKA foam rubber, has an HRR around 2500 degrees F.), PLUS the lack of suppression efforts, it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when.

When these primary engineered structure supports fail, the result is cataclysmic. Especially in core constructed structures as each floor is rated to load to a certain level. If one part of the core fails or otherwise loses its ability to support its load, the floor below is now subject to the ENTIRE load above it which is, as would be obvious, WAY beyond its acceptable load. The problem daisychains from there with each following floor, just as it did with the towers. But it DOES require a perfect storm. That's why you haven't seen structural collapse in other high rise cases such as Tulsa's Petroleum Club fire, Biloxi's high rise tenement fire, and others. Concrete protected steel members, differing load points, a bunch of different factors that serve to preserve structural integrity.

Remember, you yourself mentioned the structural success rate of preserved building integrity post-fire. But speaking of the towers, how many high rise, core constructed spray coated steel buildings have had fully fueled passenger jets centerpunch them at speed? There's been two. Towers 1 and 2. And with an understanding of the construction method, the effects of direct flame impingement on steel, and fire behavior, the "why" begins to make some sense.

I know XTR thinks he knows everything, but imma defer to TF on this one.

[Boomer.....]

The episode of Consiracy Theory (with Jesse Ventura) on 9/11:

http://www.trutv.com/video/conspiracy-theory/full-episodes/9-11.html

[texaspokieokie]

I think the building 7 conspiracy theory is the most legitimate one. Al-Qaeda brought down the twin towers, but building seven was not damaged enough to crumble like that.

I was living in NY at the time, and the rumor was it was brought down to collect the big insurance check, as with buildings like these insurance premiums go into the billions.

how did they know when al qaeda was gonna do it.
or was it a coincidence ??

[XingTheRubicon]

I know XTR thinks he knows everything, but imma defer to TF on this one.


I didn't disagree with him, I just said it seemed odd. Noone give a **** what a godless heathen that sells jewelry thinks anyway.

[sappstuf]

I think the thing with building 7 is that all the damage was on the side that faced the twin towers(South side). Because of that devastation from those collapses, we don't really have good photos of the damage. Add in the smoke from WTC 7 which was on fire and you never get a good look at the damage before it collapses and that creates doubt in people's mind. I get that I guess...

I did find this video.

_kSq663m0G8&

During the one part of the video you can see an initial collapse on the East side 5-6 seconds before the entire building collapses. The video also talks about the building's design in that it had three main trusses holding everything from the 5-7th floors up. The government report says"


The 5 s to 6 s delay between the failure of the east penthouse and the failure of the screenwall and west penthouse (shown in Fig. L–27) approximates the time it would take for the debris pile from the vertical
failure progression on the east side of the building to reach Floors 5 to 7 and damage the transfer trusses and girders in this area.

I guess in the end I will take a fireman's word on the damage..


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.

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. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day.

If a third of the building was gone from damage from the collapse and then you have uncontrolled fires burning.. Well.. What else would you expect?

[PDXsooner]

There is simply no possible way that our government has the ability to pull off this large of a "conspiracy" without completely ****ing it up. In addition, the amount of "leaks" and "sources" that would be spilling the beans at alarming rates would have already occurred.

Seriously, I am not someone that immediately dismisses conspiracies, I just don't think the people who would need to be involved are smart enough or capable enough to actually pull it off.

[Blue]

Thanks for the opinions. I got a pm from a member who knew someone personally on the pentagon flight. Your answers and that are good enough for me.

I always found it fishy and that suspicion grew the more countries we got involved with in TGWOT(War on Terror). It seemed like the perfect plan to go grab some resources and topple dictators we didnt like.

Again, thanks for the responses.

[sooner59]

I didn't disagree with him, I just said it seemed odd. Noone give a **** what a godless heathen that sells jewelry thinks anyway.

That may be true, but nobody gives a **** what you think either.

[jkjsooner]

how did they know when al qaeda was gonna do it.
or was it a coincidence ??

That was my point as well. They either had to know the WTC attack was going to happen (now you're in the realm of a huge and less believable conspiracy) or they had to obtain the explosives, get exposive demolition experts lined up, rig the building with the explosives, and set them all off in a few hours time. You would also need all of these players to remain perfectly silent for years which would be impossible under the best circumstances but considering the team would have to have been formed within an hour or two it would have been even less possible.

Simply put, nothing in this conspiracy passes even the most basic plausability tests.


On another topic, people always comment about how the towers went down so cleanly. Thay fail to realize that we're looking at a very macroscopic view of very large towers. They're not going to look anything like a five story building when it collapses. They're not going to fall over like the Leaning Tower of Pissa. The support structures would never be able to support that much force as it started to lean. In addition, just the parabolic nature of falling debris means that as you're looking from a macroscopic view things are going to tend to fall very close to the base (relatively speaking).

Ever watch videos of nuclear weapons? Ever compare the Hiroshima type bombs to the large thermonuclear explosions? The smaller create a very jagged looking very disorganized fire ball. The thermonuclear ones are so large that any deviations are dwarfed by the size of the fire ball and the fire ball resembles almost a perfect sphere. Are we to conclude that thermonuclear devices never existed because they don't resemble what we see in normal fission bombs? Of course not. I think the same analogy applies to the twin towers.

[jkjsooner]

Thanks for the opinions. I got a pm from a member who knew someone personally on the pentagon flight. Your answers and that are good enough for me.

I always found it fishy and that suspicion grew the more countries we got involved with in TGWOT(War on Terror). It seemed like the perfect plan to go grab some resources and topple dictators we didnt like.

Again, thanks for the responses.


Except we got no resources and have spent billions (trillions) on the war and added security measures. If that was some sort of plan to enrich the US then, well, it was a complete failure.

[Blue]

Except we got no resources and have spent billions (trillions) on the war and added security measures. If that was some sort of plan to enrich the US then, well, it was a complete failure.

Not everybodys broke. ;)

[jkjsooner]

Not everybodys broke. ;)

Good point.

[XingTheRubicon]

That may be true, but nobody gives a **** what you think either.

There's nothing quite as inspiring as apartment soothsayers.

[sooner59]

There's nothing quite as inspiring as apartment soothsayers.

;)

[JohnnyMack]

I didn't disagree with him, I just said it seemed odd. Noone give a **** what a godless heathen that sells jewelry thinks anyway.

I sell jewelry? Really? I did not know that.

[Mongo]

I sell jewelry? Really? I did not know that.

I was fixing to get pissed if you sold jewelry and you let me walk around with this bland navel ring

[JohnnyMack]

I was fixing to get pissed if you sold jewelry and you let me walk around with this bland navel ring

I have no earthly idea what he's talking about. Maybe he's in the market for a new pooka shell necklace?

[XingTheRubicon]

I have no earthly idea what he's talking about. Maybe he's in the market for a new pooka shell necklace?

Oh, my bad, just godless heathen then.

[Mongo]

Oh, my bad, just godless heathen then.

dont forget homo

[JohnnyMack]

Oh, my bad, just godless heathen then.

That, I can get behind.

[JohnnyMack]

dont forget homo

Speaking of getting behind. We still on for our 6 o'clock "meeting"?

[SoCaliSooner]

I have no earthly idea what he's talking about. Maybe he's in the market for a new pooka shell necklace?

I am sometimes in the market for such a thing....shark tooth and coral too.

[IndySooner]

Now all that said, you will never be able to convince me that Joel Henry Hinrichs was not intending on blowing himself up within Memorial Stadium. He used volatile chemicals and I believe they went off before he intended them to do so.

I am 100% positive that is true. That has leaked out.

[Tulsa_Fireman]

Speaking of getting behind. We still on for our 6 o'clock "meeting"?

Can you orally install a Prince Albert?

[stoopified]

Ya know when The plane carrying theMarshall Thindering Herd crashed there wasn't anything left but a big,black,smoking hole.Apparently the government was practicing for 9/11 way back in 1971.

[cantwait48]

these theories exist the same reason the bigfoot, ufo's and mountain lions in oklahoma ;) legends exist, cause people enjoy researching it, arguing about it, etc.

[Jacie]

Prior to 9/11, bin Laden through a third party, purchased building 7, outfitted it with explosives, insured it for twice what it was worth and sat back to collect the money. The destruction on 9/11 wasn't covered up, it was the cover up . . .

[TFSooner]

Prior to 9/11, bin Laden through a third party, purchased building 7, outfitted it with explosives, insured it for twice what it was worth and sat back to collect the money. The destruction on 9/11 wasn't covered up, it was the cover up . . .

This I can almost believe..................................... almost.

[AlboSooner]

Things usually happen exactly as the media reports, and as the government says. exactly.

[BudSooner]

3 multi-story steel buildings have collapsed due to fire in the history of Earth. The twin towers and building 7.


*bldg 7 due to debris from towers
We really do need a jerking off smiley around this place.


I don't know if what you say is a fact or not but there wasn't just a typical building fire involved with the collapse.Exactly.


This is incorrect. It may be just a matter of semantics, but there's been multi-story steel monolithic frame buildings right here in beautiful Tulsa that have collapsed due to fire.

Collapsing high rise buildings are a different "story".

Get it? Story? Har har har.

It's easy to disregard or ignore steel expansion ratios and tensile strength changes due to heat application. Below is a beautiful example of the effect of fire on monolithic steel structural members.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v699/xu-an/woodbeam_fire_bentsteel.jpg

The old fireground rule of thumb is a steel member will expand 12 inches per 100 foot at 1000 degrees fahrenheit. It is this very principle that establishes that one can expect full structural failure of steel joist construction in 5-10 minutes with direct flame impingement. With this expansion rate PLUS the loss of tensile strength, one can expect similar results with monolithic beams as well with sufficient live or dead loads and no passive fire protection systems (asbestos coatings, protected spaces, et cetera).

So it's NOT that the steel melts or softens so much as it expands and deforms, removing the engineered strength found in its inherent design (by twisting laterally to the plane of support as seen in the picture) and placing unintended, non-engineered stresses LATERALLY on the vertical load bearing pinnings, supports, and purlins. This I've seen firsthand. It is a very real, very dangerous scenario. Case in point, for those of you from the Tulsa area, you may remember the pool and hot tub sales place on S. 61st St. just east of Garnett that burned a few years back. Or the truck supply warehouse out in east Tulsa (3rd and 130th EA? Around in there somewhere). In both cases, simple room and contents fires caused massive deformation of primary structural members to the point of impending collapse wholly due to heat expansion and tensile strength changes.

It's an eerie situation to be in to actually see a 24" red iron I-beam twist nearly 90 degrees as it glows an angry red. And it gives all the evidence you need to understand how fire can affect unprotected steel structural members.
Exactly, and the designer recommended using a method of fire proofing the load bearing beams but in the end they went another route saving money, well that went well but i'm not even sure that the original method would have made a difference here. And I would defer to you in that arena.

Yeah, a fire insulated red steel beam is a little different than steel stud shack.

and I don't think Bush masterminded some conspiracy, hell I like W, just a diffuse flame twisting steel so severely that it falls at 200 mph thru a steel building seems odd..


It's not. Not in the least.

As you'll note in the rest of the post, we're not talking about "steel stud shacks". We're talking about Type I primary steel structural members, specifically red steel beams. It may be hard to comprehend. Lord knows when I first got into the business, when I first heard the stories, I dismissed it outright. There's no way a massive flying beam like that will do that. The scary thing is that they do. And when you introduce that volume of fire relative to the space without vent or fuel control, PLUS the impact, PLUS the heat release rate of the room contents (Ex. Polyurethane foam, AKA foam rubber, has an HRR around 2500 degrees F.), PLUS the lack of suppression efforts, it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when.

When these primary engineered structure supports fail, the result is cataclysmic. Especially in core constructed structures as each floor is rated to load to a certain level. If one part of the core fails or otherwise loses its ability to support its load, the floor below is now subject to the ENTIRE load above it which is, as would be obvious, WAY beyond its acceptable load. The problem daisychains from there with each following floor, just as it did with the towers. But it DOES require a perfect storm. That's why you haven't seen structural collapse in other high rise cases such as Tulsa's Petroleum Club fire, Biloxi's high rise tenement fire, and others. Concrete protected steel members, differing load points, a bunch of different factors that serve to preserve structural integrity.

Remember, you yourself mentioned the structural success rate of preserved building integrity post-fire. But speaking of the towers, how many high rise, core constructed spray coated steel buildings have had fully fueled passenger jets centerpunch them at speed? There's been two. Towers 1 and 2. And with an understanding of the construction method, the effects of direct flame impingement on steel, and fire behavior, the "why" begins to make some sense.
Yep, take a walk inside the Williams Center, same designer, same basic design.....after 9/11 I made a trip to speak with the bank and it felt strange knowing that a building built in the same manner fell due to a terrorist act. In fact, before walking in the doors....I made a point to look towards the sky.:(


I know XTR thinks he knows everything, but imma defer to TF on this one.+100

[BU BEAR]

I'm not trying to sound like a dick, I just wanna further what I said...For the people who think that a missile, not a plane struck the Pentagon..how did the Gov't make 64 people disappear? What about the families of the victims? Duped this whole time? Yeah OK...

Exactly. Included among the missing was Barbara Olson, wife of the then-solicitor general, Ted Olson.

[jkjsooner]

double post

[jkjsooner]

Ya know when The plane carrying theMarshall Thindering Herd crashed there wasn't anything left but a big,black,smoking hole.Apparently the government was practicing for 9/11 way back in 1971.

You make that suggestion on a 9/11 conspiracy website and you'll get plenty of people believing it. I'm convinced that some of those are meeting grounds for paranoid schizophrenics as I can't imagine anyone else believing some of the crazy crap they believe.

I wonder how many people just mess with those nuts' mind. Digitally alter an image and then ask them why there are digitally altered images out there. Crap like that would just feed their distrust.

On second thought, conspiracy theories can be dangerous so I wouldn't want to create more problems for society. I would be fun though.


It's funny how their minds work. They see that someone made a false death claim to attempt to get insurance/victim funds and that proves that there's a huge conspiracy. Most rational people would have concluded that with 3000 dead and most of them not identifiable (even via DNA) that there would be a handful of people that would attempt to game the system.

[bluedogok]

I and about 10 others spent about 9 months working night shift putting the entire WTC complex into Computervision cad drawings and Oracle database linking for The Port Authority of NY & NJ, the owners (at that time) of the entire complex. We worked fromt he original documents with field verification. The building had fireproofing for most of the interior columns either through concrete encasement, cementitious coating or fire rated gypsum wallboard furring. The problem with any of those methods is when the rated assembly is compromised, and I can tell you that a large passenger jet loaded with passengers and fuel will shatter any of those coatings/coverings and render the steel naked to fire and the amount of fuel dumped into the building is far beyond what UL or the NFPA would ever calculate as a standard. At the time the WTC towers were built there was not the number of epoxy coatings that there are now that have more impact resistance to the point of failure. Also the destruction of the core allowed the fuel/fire to travel down the tower through the voids in protection super heating the structure.

The building that the IRS was in here that got hit by the small plane had similar steel failure in the beams and joists in the area of impact but due to the small plane, limited amount of fuel and ability to get to the fire made it easier to put it out quicker to limit the amount of structural damage.

[Turd_Ferguson]

In that 9/11 movie that was mentioned on netflix, they show the first tower collapsing and ask you to listen to the charges going off as the building comes down. I would think anyone with half a brain would know that is the concrete floors pancaking each other as it fell. It boggles the mind how many people these day's have no common sense...

[GDC]

Wm9sKNIE5s0