johnbradley Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 ok, that sounds possible...kinda looks a lot like a controlled demo tho, you have to admit - it remains the only steel skyscraper in history to have collapsed from fire alone. there are lots of examples of comparable towers being on fire for longer, and remaining upright. it was 300 feet from twin towers, the other world trade buildings much closer to them remained standing. it also collapsed pretty blooming quickly! the owner of the building said to 'pull it', and it appears clear in the context that he was referring to the demolition of WTC7. in the context it was given in its extremely hard to twist it any other way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twiglet Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 ok, that sounds possible...kinda looks a lot like a controlled demo tho, you have to admit - it remains the only steel skyscraper in history to have collapsed from fire alone. there are lots of examples of comparable towers being on fire for longer, and remaining upright. it was 300 feet from twin towers, the other world trade buildings much closer to them remained standing. it also collapsed pretty blooming quickly! the owner of the building said to 'pull it', and it appears clear in the context that he was referring to the demolition of WTC7. in the context it was given in its extremely hard to twist it any other way. FEMAs original report on WTC7 wasn't conclusive. They have conducted an investigation, the report of which is due this year so I don't think anyone from either side is really able to comment on this yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 Point by point Plenty of buildings collapse from structural damage caused by fire to steel. It's a fact that fire weakens steels integrity. That's why such a lot of effort is put into fire protection. However, any fire protection can only last so long and the various parts of buildings are rated as such. Fire protection WILL fail, there's no doubt about that. Rapid collapse: Well yes, there's a lot of weight there once gravity takes effect. "Pull it": Silverstein said at the time, and ever since, that he was talking about pulling out the firefighters. Couple that with the fact that there is no demolition industry term to 'pull' a building then I think we can discount that one. There's no mystery to this one, just wishful thinking on the part of people who are looking for a conspiracy. Even FEMA have not been able to reach a full and final conclusion on 7, but that doesn't mean it's suspicious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
depoix Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 Twig let nicely (yet again) summarises the single missing ingredient for a conspiracy.... ... reality. Daley - just to pose you the same question that I did to johnbradley - how could you rig detonation charges to 3 public buildings without being detected? quite easily, the people work office hours,a squad of delta force specialists could gain access as a cleaning company or maintainance crew,there wouldnt be any rush,it could have been done over a period of months,...................not that i believe any of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 Demolition charges are hardly the kind of thing that goes undetected in a occupied with workers and maintenance staff 24 hours a day 7 days a week. If you'd ever seen a building rigged for demolition it would be clear that's its not something you can do covertly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bartfarst Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 And yet we are led to believe that a hijackers' passport survived? Small items from an explosion scatter like confetti. There were recognisable bits of personal ID from Lockerbie passengers found for miles around. The same went for 9/11 - remember that a lot of debris, including bits of plane and cargo, went straight through the building on impact before the fireball lit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bartfarst Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 quite easily, the people work office hours,a squad of delta force specialists could gain access as a cleaning company or maintainance crew,there wouldnt be any rush,it could have been done over a period of months,...................not that i believe any of it No - the amount of disruption to the fabric of the building required to get to critical points of the structure would be massive. And the amount of explosive required to bring something like that down in controlled fashion is huge. It could not be done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bartfarst Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 I disagree with this. I haven't made my mind up yet as to whether the official explanation of 9/11 is true or not, but you have to take denial into account here. If (and it's a big if) the US government were behind 9/11, that's such a chilling concept that people simply wouldn't want to believe it. The general public simply wouldn't accept it to be true, even if convincing evidence was placed directly in front of them. It would just be dismissed as a conspiracy. For this reason, a large-scale cover-up wouldn't be necessary. I like your concept but there would be so many people involved that enough would blow the whistle - imagine the money on offer from the press, let alone people's conscience. And if the evidence were convincing, it would be believed. If Honest Tony of No 10 can't sneak a few bought peerages past a dozen mates, how could the US authorites keep a secret that thousands of people know about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
depoix Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 No - the amount of disruption to the fabric of the building required to get to critical points of the structure would be massive. And the amount of explosive required to bring something like that down in controlled fashion is huge. It could not be done.i reckon a cutting charge could be placed on each landing,but without a lay out plan you dont know if the walls were panelled to allow access for maintainance to the girder work,nothing is impossible given the time and motive,as for the amount of explosive bieng massive, i would need the width and depth and total number of girders to work it out,but i cant see it running into hundreds of pounds for each floor level,using the formula of d squared divided by forty i reckon a couple of pounds per girder would cut through them with no bother Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bartfarst Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 i reckon a cutting charge could be placed on each landing,but without a lay out plan you dont know if the walls were panelled to allow access for maintainance to the girder work,nothing is impossible given the time and motive,as for the amount of explosive bieng massive, i would need the width and depth and total number of girders to work it out,but i cant see it running into hundreds of pounds for each floor level,using the formula of d squared divided by forty i reckon a couple of pounds per girder would cut through them with no bother True, shaped cutting charges are relatively light, but it takes a whole lot of charge to bring a big building down, and a lot of disrution. Also true that nothing's impossible, but could somebody come in and re-truss your roof without you noticing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.