WTC7 in Freefall: No Longer Controversial

[Mightyqueen801]

Originally Posted by newonecoming2

Nope, I don't do math that way, I do the math in a different way, I've got Asperger's. The energy to deform and collapse the building is in the crumple zone. Personally in the case of building 7 I have my Q's regarding what happened. But the evidence was destroyed and the investigators weren't let on sight. (That screams coverup) The lag from when it started moving until when it entered free fall is the work being done to deform a significant amount of metal. The movement during this time was largely horizontal not vertical. If you look at the twin towers you can see the collapse proceeding up the falling top part as it pushes on the part below it. Try standing on two empty soda pop cans. (it may take three) touch the side of all of them at the same time. You will come very close to entering free fall. With the steal pulled out of line it takes very little energy to bend it.

The center of gravity of the building above the point of failure was not in free fall. The top corner was.



Here is a way to look at it better. Draw two boxes one above the other. The top box is the more or less ridged top part of the building. The bottom box is the crumple zone. The crumple zone is pushing on the building below it, transferring energy to it in the form of starting it moving and deforming it mechanically. The center of gravity of the crumple zone is not in free fall. But it isn't pushing on the top part of the building allowing the top to be in free fall. When the crumple zone runs out of crumple then it starts pushing on the top part.



As I said I do have My Q's about building 7. But they will never be answered because the evidence was destroyed and the investigators weren't allowed in sight.


There was a significant amount of fuel stored in building 7.

What does that mean?

[Fred314X]

Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801

What does that mean?

It means someone thinks they have "proof" of a conspiracy.

[workingclasshero]

Why is it when we talk about bld7, people never:

1. Admit that the building got BADLY damaged when the towers fell:

a) the entire front fascia was sheared off

b) a 12-16 story gash(hole) in the corner(main supports)(Proves the FACT that there was MASSIVE structural damage)

2. Admit that there was an entire ConED substation(electric plant) below the building. (this article PROVES the substation and the new one rebuilt in May04,, It also gives a good description of the transformers)

Lower Manhattan Development Corporation - GOVERNOR PATAKI JOINS CON EDISON TO MARK OPENING OF ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION AT 7 WORLD TRADE CENTER


3. Admit that the building had 20 or more back up generators (4 on the 23rd floor, 3 on the 7th floor, 14 on the 5th floor, 1 on the 8th floor w/fuel tank, 4 on the 46th floor, 1 on the 9th floor)(Proves the FACT of many things that could have BLOWN up within the building supporting the statements of "heard explosions")

4. Admit that the building had 22 main Transformers(which can explode if heated(full of oil))(some of them 2 stories tall) and 2 dry transformers (10 1st floor, 12 5th floor, 2 7th floor)(proves the FACT of more things that could have blown up)

5. Admit that the Fuel source for those generators was stored in the building and equaled 18 tankers (18,000 gallons on the 2nd floor, and 48,000 in the lower level, 300 gallons on the 23rd floor, 300 gallons on the 5th floor, 100 gallons on the 9th floor, 300 gallons on the 7th floor)(proves the FACT of a major fuel source, along with all the office furnature)

6. Admit the there was LP gas lines running throughout the building

7. Admit that the Penthouse fell FIRST

8. Admit that the building did NOT fall symmetrically it collapsed from the center(the north wall even covered the debris

9. Admit that it did NOT fall with in its footprint, it covered "barkley street" and caused SIGNIFICANT DAMAGED(fell onto) another building (30 west broadway) and the Verizon building( just some logic here cant be in its "own footprint if it went OUTSIDE of its footprint)(ABSOLUTELY proves that it was not a PERFECT symmetrical fall)

10. Admit that the FIREMEN, said the fire could not be CONTROLLED

A) I will give just two,,,,"We walked over by number Seven World Trade Center as it was burning and saw this 40-plus story building with fire on nearly all floors." –FDNY Lieutenant Robert LaRocca

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/package...HIC/9110081.PD (broken link)

b). The major concern at that time was number Seven, building number Seven, which had taken a big hit from the north tower. When it fell, it ripped steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the facade on Vesey Street. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing. –FDNY Chief Frank Fellini

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/package...IC/9110217.PDF (broken link)

11. Admit that there was a problem with the water supply(NO WATER)

12 the only mention "3 buildings" but not the other 10 buildings were destroyed that dat in NYC

13. Admit that to wire a building.:

a) would take months.

b) beams would HAVE to be cut ,making the building NOT safe to go into for months prior to the collapse(proves that there is not way the building could have been imploded since monday sept 10 was a WORK DAY)

c) explosives don't like fire and heat

d) that the term "pull" is NOT used in Explosive demos

[wdavid002]

When are you losers going to stop with this nonsense....good lord..nobody is interested in listening to your paranoid garbage anymore...move on..

[ergohead]

Originally Posted by wdavid002

When are you losers going to stop with this nonsense....good lord..nobody is interested in listening to your paranoid garbage anymore...move on..

Why are less detone ate the buildings.

[Fred314X]

Some people just aren't satisfied unless they're living in a world where deep, dark conspiracies are lurking around every corner.

If it isn't the World Trade Center being brought down by our own government, it's the President falsifying his birth certificate. If it's not that, it's Lee Harvey Oswald as the lone assassin of President Kennedy. Perhaps it's "proof" that the world is coming to an end in December, 2012. Or maybe the moon landing was faked. And if it's not that...

The operative phrase is "never-ending."

[Mightyqueen801]

Originally Posted by Fred314X

Some people just aren't satisfied unless they're living in a world where deep, dark conspiracies are lurking around every corner.

If it isn't the World Trade Center being brought down by our own government, it's the President falsifying his birth certificate. If it's not that, it's Lee Harvey Oswald as the lone assassin of President Kennedy. Perhaps it's "proof" that the world is coming to an end in December, 2012. Or maybe the moon landing was faked. And if it's not that...

The operative phrase is "never-ending."

Or that Shakespeare actually wrote the Bible--the clue is supposedly found in a chapter where the word "shake" appears 46 words into the chapter, and the word "spear" appears 46 words from the end of the chapter.

William Shakespeare lived to be 46 years old, DON'T YOU GET IT?

I am NOT making this up. There are people who believe this.

[newonecoming2]

Originally Posted by ergohead

"Where large sums of money are concerned, it is advisable to trust nobody."
Agatha Christie

Good quote.

[newonecoming2]

Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801

Why did I bother to write that entire post on Silverstein and the insurance issues if you weren't going to bother to read it, and then try to counterbalance it with some truther article?

What EXACTLY is your point in reiterating this:

The insurance company, Swiss Re, paid Mr. Silverstein $4.6 Billion — a princely return on a relatively paltry investment of $124 million

Explain, please, how this is a princely investment. What exactly do you not comprehend about the statement "He has to used the insurance money to rebuild per the lease and per the insurance policy" and "Rebuilding costs are 9 billion and rising". He doesn't have enough to rebuild. It's the topic of countless articles and opinions in NY commercial real estate publications. Yet the truthers cling so desperately to their Internet stories that's it's bizarre.

You are trying to push some idea that Silverstein gets this insurance money and can just keep it and spend it any way his little heart desires. DOES THAT REALLY MAKE SENSE TO YOU?????????????? If so, I can't help you. No one can.

You can't even get the damn insurance company right. Swiss Re is one of ELEVEN insurance companies that combined to meet the payout.

When I go into a store to buy something and they ask can I help you I say "No I'm beyond help." Knowing something is the first step to doing something about it.

[newonecoming2]

Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801

What does that mean?

It means that The report that I read was the investigatores were over there and the evedence was over here. They had to ask for evedence from the demolition crue they weren't let in to see for themselves what it was like. This may not be entirly credible.

Looking at more video and watching it fall I think that the fire did it. (building 7) That is my personal opinion and not backed by enough data to be considered more than that. 1 and 2 were brought down by the airplanes.