Evidence of heavy smoke coming out of WTC7 prior to WTC1 collapse

[pgimeno]

East wall of WTC7 showing heavy smoke, while WTC1 is standing on the background:
http://www.formauri.es/personal/pgimeno/xfiles/cache/wtc7-smoke-wtc1-stands.jpg

This still is taken from "102 Minutes that Changed America", from minute 43:33 of part 1 here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2947888180526230130

If the timeline in the documentary is accurate, WTC2 is still standing by then too and probably obscured by the smoke in that shot.

And this is obviously not the most reliable source, but here is another shot showing smoke coming out of WTC7:

http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/wtc7/pics/NYC20193.jpg

This is figure 5-91 from NCSTAR 1-9 Vol 1 p. 181 (p.225 in PDF):

http://www.formauri.es/personal/pgimeno/xfiles/cache/wtc7-west-face.jpg

It shows a hint of previous smoke in the upper windows.

Not that it means any kind of conspiracy: the sprinkler system was in good health before any collapse, so the fires could be extinguished. However it strikes me that NIST overlooked this. Maybe it's because they didn't attribute any importance to it. I am also wondering what does it mean in terms of Barry Jennings' testimony. Any ideas?

ETA: Or did I have it wrong and that one is actually WTC2?

[Thunder]

Not that it means any kind of conspiracy: the sprinkler system was in good health before any collapse, so the fires could be extinguished. However it strikes me that NIST overlooked this. Maybe it's because they didn't attribute any importance to it. I am also wondering what does it mean in terms of Barry Jennings' testimony. Any ideas?

I have to say, the first pic does indeed look like smoke coming from WTC 7.

2nd pic does look like it as well.

hmmm..

:confused::confused::confused:




.........is it not possible that debree from the 2nd plane smashed into WTC 7?

this is my best guess.

[Thunder]

oh crap!!

you are correct. that is indeed smoke coming from WTC 1.

wtc 7 had angled sides, angling inward towards the south. the building side you see is actually the eastern edge of WTC 1.

i guess this has been quickly debunked.

if you you look at the photo with your monitor turned to the side, you can see the seem between the edge of wtc 7 and wtc 1.

[femr2]

http://www.formauri.es/personal/pgimeno/xfiles/cache/wtc7-smoke-wtc1-stands.jpg

The building in the background is WTC 2.

The building emitting smoke is WTC 1.

WTC 7 is *just* obscuring the East face of WTC 1.

[Grizzly Bear]

The building in the background is WTC 2.

The building emitting smoke is WTC 1.

WTC 7 is *just* obscuring the East face of WTC 1.

Yup, though the blown highlights in the pic make it difficult to discern WTC 1 from WTC7. And you can tell by the damage to the tower which one it was. Unfortunately the OP is in error.

[Oystein]

If you look at the map of the WTC:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1e/WTC_Building_Arrangement_and_Site_Plan.svg

Picture 1 was taken from West Broadway, probably near Park Ave.
The low building in the foreground shoud be 30 West Broadway.
The east facade of WTC7 points towards the north-east corner of WTC1.

[RedIbis]

The reddish bldg on the right hand side, with the smoke pouring out of it is definitely WTC 7. It's easy to identify it with the double windows running up the corner.

ETA: I can see where the confusion is now. The second tower is behind WTC 7. Tough to see at first.

[Thunder]

oh well........"MAGZ" has been debunked. :)

[pgimeno]

Yup, though the blown highlights in the pic make it difficult to discern WTC 1 from WTC7. And you can tell by the damage to the tower which one it was. Unfortunately the OP is in error.

That's not unfortunate. I love to learn. Sorry for making you all losing your time with my mistake, I didn't see that it was WTC1 the one smoking.

[Macgyver1968]

Dude...no steel structure has fallen due to fire....debunk that!

Holy sh.. I've been spending too much time at the DI forum.

[Grizzly Bear]

That's not unfortunate. I love to learn. Sorry for making you all losing your time with my mistake, I didn't see that it was WTC1 the one smoking.
Eh, I make mistakes like that from time to time so no worries. If my post came out derogatory in anyway I apologize, but that wasn't the intent. The exposure settings really did make the perspective a little confusing at first glance so I can understand why anyone might have misidentified anything in the pic.

[pgimeno]

Eh, I make mistakes like that from time to time so no worries. If my post came out derogatory in anyway I apologize, but that wasn't the intent. The exposure settings really did make the perspective a little confusing at first glance so I can understand why anyone might have misidentified anything in the pic.

No such thing perceived, no need to apologize. I was just watching the documentary and when I saw that part I went wow!

[Oystein]

How easy debunking 9/11 mythtakes can be if the person making an erroneous claim is actually critical and keeps an open mind and comes here to test a hypothesis (and discard it if found lacking) :)