How WTC 7 was pulled down

Heiwa · 30th December 2008, 01:18 AM

It is today quite simple to conclude how WTC7 was pulled down on 9/11!
According NIST Final report of the WTC7 collapse
http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201A.pdf
(20 November 2008) pp 47-48 one explanation is:
"The probable collapse sequence that caused the global collapse of WTC 7 was initiated by the buckling of Column 79 … The buckling of Column 79 led to a vertical progression of floor failures up to the east penthouse and to the buckling of Columns 80 and 81. An east to west horizontal progression of interior column buckling followed due to loss of lateral support to adjacent columns, forces exerted by falling debris, and load redistribution from other buckled columns. … Global collapse occurred as the entire building above the buckled region moved downward as a single unit."

However, NIST has agreed/confirmed the finding that the upper part of WTC7 free falls (acceleration 9.82 m/s²) for 2.25 seconds during the collapse, i.e. there is no support/resistance of the upper part above floor 16, when it displaces downward abt 32 meters. See e.g. figure 3.15 in the report. What a free fall drop is, is explained at
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=gC44L0-2zL8 .

NIST suggests that this free fall displacement was initiated by failure of Column no. 79 between floors 11/13 followed by a vertical and horizontal progression of failures (no details of course except some strange figures) below floor 16 that apparently removed all support/resistance of the upper part for 32 meters vertically down at one side only and the complete structure horizontally.

But now the problem! A free falling upper part of WTC7 (above floor 16) does not apply any load at all on the structure below floor 16! A free falling mass does not apply any force on anything! So how can the upper part/mass above floor 16 damage the lower part below floor 16 as suggested by NIST during these 2.25 seconds? What kind of structural analysis is done ... when no loads are applied?

Furthermore - NIST suggests that the upper part/mass deforms itself during these 2.25 seconds ... when no forces at all are applied to it (all masses of the upper part are in free fall!). Same question ... how can a free fall upper part/mass deform?
NIST has been asked these questions ... and could not reply! Thus the NIST WTC 7 report is of no value.

The NIST statement on page 57 - "Computer simulations of … the structural collapse can be used to predict a complex degradation and collapse of a building", has no foundation in the case of WTC7. NIST has not done a correct job! The WTC 7 structure does not collapse as shown in figures 3.10-14 due to removing a part of Column no. 79. Quite easy for anybody to verify! No loads are applied on anything by a free falling mass!

An explanation how the 24 core columns could suddenly 'disappear' to produce free fall of the structure above is given at
http://www.journalof911studies.com/v...and_Nano-1.pdf .

Thus, the 24 core columns below floor 16 were simply simultaneously burnt off using, e.g. sol-gel nanothermites sprayed on the columns that then evaporated (!) instantaneously. That explains why no lower (below floor 16) core columns are found in the debris of WTC7 (and that the pull down of WTC 7 was an inside job, I am sorry to conclude)!

Jonnyclueless · 30th December 2008, 01:19 AM

I'd have to see it demonstrated with pizza boxes.

dtugg · 30th December 2008, 01:23 AM

So it was thermite? Awesome! The case is finally solved after seven years. Wait...weren't you the genius engineer that said it was because of some sort of vacuum effect? Hmmmm.....

Heiwa · 30th December 2008, 01:41 AM

Originally Posted by Jonnyclueless

I'd have to see it demonstrated with pizza boxes.

It is easy. Just drop (free fall!) a stack of pizza boxes. During the free fall they neither deform, nor destroy anything.

Heiwa · 30th December 2008, 01:44 AM

Originally Posted by dtugg

So it was thermite? Awesome! The case is finally solved after seven years. Wait...weren't you the genius engineer that said it was because of some sort of vacuum effect? Hmmmm.....

Thanks for calling me a genius engineer. Yes, when the thermite burns very quickly it uses oxygen mainly in the gel itself but also in the surrounding air that creates a temporary and local under pressure (not vacuum) that assists in the pull down.

dtugg · 30th December 2008, 01:44 AM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

It is easy. Just drop (free fall!) a stack of pizza boxes. During the free fall they neither deform, nor destroy anything.

I just got a two matchbox cars and crashed them into each other as hard as I can. Neither were deformed whatsoever. That must mean that every single car accident is an inside job! Thank for illuminating me, I never realized!

Seriously, Heiwa, are you actually insane or are you just messing with us?

dtugg · 30th December 2008, 01:49 AM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

Thanks for calling me a genius engineer. Yes, when the thermite burns very quickly it uses oxygen mainly in the gel itself but also in the surrounding air that creates a temporary and local under pressure (not vacuum) that assists in the pull down.

Cool. I await to see the calculations of the pressure burning thermite can produce and the calculations that show that said pressure can help destroy a large skyscraper. Thank you, genius engineer, for revealing the truth to us sheeple after seven years. What would we ever do without you?

UNLoVedRebel · 30th December 2008, 03:37 AM

Maybe you can tell us where these "nano-thermite cutter charges" were. Because I didn't see any.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Heiwa · 30th December 2008, 04:49 AM

Originally Posted by UNLoVedRebel

Maybe you can tell us where these "nano-thermite cutter charges" were. Because I didn't see any.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Of course you do not see any cutter charges or sol-gel nanothermites sprayed on the columns in the linked video. I just feel sorry for NYFD chief Nigro who believes the NIST WTC7 report explains the total collapse. Probably he was not aware of the free fall, etc.? You can of course do structural analysis of a free fall object; all the stresses inside it are zero! No loads are applied on such a structure. But according NIST the structure deforms! Quite magic! Actually clear evidence that NIST is 100% incompetent to carry out the structural damage analysis.

Troy wins · 30th December 2008, 04:54 AM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

But now the problem! A free falling upper part of WTC7 (above floor 16) does not apply any load at all on the structure below floor 16! A free falling mass does not apply any force on anything! So how can the upper part/mass above floor 16 damage the lower part below floor 16 as suggested by NIST during these 2.25 seconds? What kind of structural analysis is done ... when no loads are applied?

Furthermore - NIST suggests that the upper part/mass deforms itself during these 2.25 seconds ... when no forces at all are applied to it (all masses of the upper part are in free fall!). Same question ... how can a free fall upper part/mass deform?
NIST has been asked these questions ... and could not reply! Thus the NIST WTC 7 report is of no value.

Not to let the new guy humor you or anything

but give us a frickin' timeframe here. When did these columns evaporate. Why do they give this away??

Were they in sequence, did they decide to evaporate them on one side first.

Were they blowing them up all day with bombs, seemingly for no reason other than for investigooglers to uncover on the internet?

Seems to me like you're implying they evaporated the columns on one side after failure initiation. Which is a really, really bad way to demolish a building.

Dr Adequate · 30th December 2008, 05:41 AM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

It is today quite simple to conclude how WTC7 was pulled down on 9/11!
According NIST Final report of the WTC7 collapse
http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201A.pdf
(20 November 2008) pp 47-48 one explanation is:
"The probable collapse sequence that caused the global collapse of WTC 7 was initiated by the buckling of Column 79 … The buckling of Column 79 led to a vertical progression of floor failures up to the east penthouse and to the buckling of Columns 80 and 81. An east to west horizontal progression of interior column buckling followed due to loss of lateral support to adjacent columns, forces exerted by falling debris, and load redistribution from other buckled columns. … Global collapse occurred as the entire building above the buckled region moved downward as a single unit."

However, NIST has agreed/confirmed the finding that the upper part of WTC7 free falls (acceleration 9.82 m/s²) for 2.25 seconds during the collapse, i.e. there is no support/resistance of the upper part above floor 16, when it displaces downward abt 32 meters. See e.g. figure 3.15 in the report. What a free fall drop is, is explained at
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=gC44L0-2zL8 .

NIST suggests that this free fall displacement was initiated by failure of Column no. 79 between floors 11/13 followed by a vertical and horizontal progression of failures (no details of course except some strange figures) below floor 16 that apparently removed all support/resistance of the upper part for 32 meters vertically down at one side only and the complete structure horizontally.

But now the problem! A free falling upper part of WTC7 (above floor 16) does not apply any load at all on the structure below floor 16! A free falling mass does not apply any force on anything! So how can the upper part/mass above floor 16 damage the lower part below floor 16 as suggested by NIST during these 2.25 seconds? What kind of structural analysis is done ... when no loads are applied?

Furthermore - NIST suggests that the upper part/mass deforms itself during these 2.25 seconds ... when no forces at all are applied to it (all masses of the upper part are in free fall!). Same question ... how can a free fall upper part/mass deform?
NIST has been asked these questions ... and could not reply!

You mean you emailed them this gibberish and they ignored it?

I'm not surprised.

ferd burfle · 30th December 2008, 06:10 AM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

Yes, when the thermite burns very quickly it uses oxygen mainly in the gel itself but also in the surrounding air that creates a temporary and local under pressure (not vacuum) that assists in the pull down.

Let's see, the thermite reaction is

Fe2O3 + 2Al -> 2Fe + Al2O3 + Heat

So it looks like there's no net consumption of oxygen. But we do get heat, lots of it. And the last I knew, heating gases makes them expand, not contract.

Oh, by the way, sol-gel is a process by which you make make something, typically a ceramic. The finished product of a sol gel process is not a gel.

By my count, that's about two and a half fails. If you have a day job, say flipping burgers, I suggest you hold onto it for dear life.

Regards,

Ferd

A W Smith · 30th December 2008, 06:32 AM

Only the exterior shell fell at near free fall acceleration for 2.25 seconds. Not the core. The core collapsed first as observed by the east mechanical penthouse collapse. And you know that.

JimBenArm · 30th December 2008, 06:49 AM

Originally Posted by A W Smith

Only the exterior shell fell at near free fall acceleration for 2.25 seconds. Not the core. The core collapsed first as observed by the east mechanical penthouse collapse. And you know that.

(bolding mine)
Never, ever assume they know anything. You will be wrong more often than not. Especially with the crop of "truth seekers" we have around here now.

Troy wins · 30th December 2008, 06:50 AM

Maybe you should be nicer to NIST, Heiwa

after all, they would 'know what's going on', right? And were probably just told to lie to you

Invite Sunder around for tea. Maybe something will let slip about what NIST 'really' found about WTC7. Trust me...can't fail

nicepants · 30th December 2008, 07:46 AM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

It is today quite simple to conclude how WTC7 was pulled down on 9/11!

Nothing in your post mentioned anything to do with the definition of the word "pull".

TriskettheKid · 30th December 2008, 08:01 AM

Ah, thermite. It's so useful in destroying things.

I mean, 1,000 pounds of thermite should EASILY cut through an SUV, right?

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Drudgewire · 30th December 2008, 08:53 AM

Originally Posted by nicepants

Nothing in your post mentioned anything to do with the definition of the word "pull".

Like "truth," "proof" and "evidence," "pull" has a definition for twoofers different than it does for everyone else on the planet.

T.A.M. · 30th December 2008, 09:00 AM

How frustrating it must be to know the truth, that explosives were used, and to have no one listen or give a ****.

oh well...moving on, the paint on my wall is drying quite nicely.

TAM

Corsair 115 · 30th December 2008, 09:49 AM

Originally Posted by dtugg

Seriously, Heiwa, are you actually insane or are you just messing with us?

Why couldn't it be both?

phunk · 30th December 2008, 10:03 AM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

Thus, the 24 core columns below floor 16 were simply simultaneously burnt off using, e.g. sol-gel nanothermites sprayed on the columns that then evaporated (!) instantaneously. That explains why no lower (below floor 16) core columns are found in the debris of WTC7 (and that the pull down of WTC 7 was an inside job, I am sorry to conclude)!

LOL. You now think they evaporated 24 core columns almost instantly?

1337m4n · 30th December 2008, 10:14 AM

Originally Posted by phunk

LOL. You now think they evaporated 24 core columns almost instantly?

Thermite has magic powers and can do anything a Truther wants it to do.

Hey Heiwa, why don't you quote the part from NIST where they talk about free-fall; the PDF isn't loading. Maybe we'll learn something.

Jonnyclueless · 30th December 2008, 10:41 AM

Heiwa is right. NIST also could answer my questions about the space beams involved. Thus proving the building was brought down by space beams.

Quad4_72 · 30th December 2008, 11:54 AM

I don't remember cables being attached to WTC7 anywhere.

Sword_Of_Truth · 30th December 2008, 12:03 PM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

However, NIST has agreed/confirmed the finding that the upper part of WTC7 free falls (acceleration 9.82 m/s²) for 2.25 seconds during the collapse,

This is why the twoof movement is dead. They have gone from claiming that all of WTC7 came down at free fall throughout the entire collapse during to conceding that only part of WTC7 came down at free fall for part of the collapse.

That even a multi-stundie nominee and poster child for scientific illiteracy is willing to give up the ghost on what was once the most infallible twoofer dogma about twooferdoms holiest shrine just further proves the intellectual full retreat of twooferdom.

This is like getting the catholic church to concede that the pope is a mortal man and thus might occasionally talk completely out his ass.

beachnut · 30th December 2008, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

It is easy. Just drop (free fall!) a stack of pizza boxes. During the free fall they neither deform, nor destroy anything.

How cool! You have made pizza boxes out of steel beams and added office furniture and stuff to make a model?

Or is the cheese the concrete?

What is the pepperoni?

Your grandkids will see your idiotic ideas online forever more. How sad to know granddad is a physics failure proven by insane posts with kids jumping on beds to explain why you don’t understand physics, structures, or anything about 9/11.

UNLoVedRebel · 30th December 2008, 01:12 PM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

Of course you do not see any cutter charges or sol-gel nanothermites sprayed on the columns in the linked video. I just feel sorry for NYFD chief Nigro who believes the NIST WTC7 report explains the total collapse. Probably he was not aware of the free fall, etc.? You can of course do structural analysis of a free fall object; all the stresses inside it are zero! No loads are applied on such a structure. But according NIST the structure deforms! Quite magic! Actually clear evidence that NIST is 100% incompetent to carry out the structural damage analysis.

So, you want to tell us WHY we don't see any "cutter charges" or "sol-gel nanothermies" inside tower 7 on 9/11. Because, you predicted they would be there, and they weren't. So.........................

jhunter1163 · 30th December 2008, 03:54 PM

Seems like a good place for this...

Originally Posted by jhunter1163

Tune: Barry Mann's "Who Put The Bomp"

Oh, I'd like to meet the guy
Who dropped the bomb
That made ol' Dylan think "conspiracy"...

(chorus)
Who put the bomb, in the Pent-a-Pentagon?
Who put the nan in the nano-nano-thermite?
Who put the HOP in the HOP-LIHOP-MIHOP?
Who put the dip in the dip-a-dip(rule8)?
Who was that man?
I'd like to kick his (rule8)
He made our Dylan think about CT...

When ol' Dylan heard
Bomb-ba-ba-bomb-ba-bomb-a-bomb-bomb
Every word went right into his heart
And when Jones heard them saying
Nan-a-nan-a-nano-nano-thermite
He said "I've got to play a part"..

So... (repeat chorus)

Each time he's alone
Chingity-chingity-chingity-chingity-ching
Sets ol' Dylan's heart all aglow
And when LC recruits a
Dip-da-dip-a-dip-dip-a-dip-da-dip
He tumbles down the rabbit hole..

So.. (repeat chorus)

leftysergeant · 30th December 2008, 06:49 PM

It free-fell for 2.5 seconds. whoop. Then it met resistance. Why would it have to crush things that were already falling at free-fall?

Has anyone pointed out that there are gaps in your reasoning?

BTW, has anyone ever seen footage of the collapse from the south?

Arus808 · 30th December 2008, 07:01 PM

can anyone show me footage of the cables that were attached to the building so they could pull it down?

Gord_in_Toronto · 30th December 2008, 08:20 PM

Originally Posted by Arus808

can anyone show me footage of the cables that were attached to the building so they could pull it down?

Of course not -- they were invisible stealth technology cables.

But I do have a photo of a similar cable:

o===================o

Furcifer · 30th December 2008, 09:22 PM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

Thus, the 24 core columns below floor 16 were simply simultaneously burnt off using, e.g. sol-gel nanothermites sprayed on the columns that then evaporated (!) instantaneously.

This is the stupidest thing I have seen posted in regards to 9/11 in a very long time. Without being deliberately idiotic, I can't see anyone making a statement like this.

JoeyDonuts · 30th December 2008, 10:57 PM

An interesting insight onto thermite googling:

Google "thermite" and you're presented with mostly reputable articles about its chemical makeup and a few on its construction. Two on the top page deal with 9/11 - one from whatreallyhappened.com and the other is a 9/11 debunker site.

Google "sol gel nanothermite" and the overwhelming volume is all 9/11 conspiracy sites. The only semi-reputable link returned is this:

http://aiche.confex.com/aiche/2007/p...act_104182.htm

This appears to be the abstract of a paper written on experiments with sol-gel nanothermite filed in 2007. Notice the Picatinny Arsenal referenced at the top. I'm not really adept at reading these sorts of things, so I'm not sure to what degree the Army was involved in the experiment. Most likely it was an "official observer." This seems to clash with other reports of it being developed at LLNL in the 1998-1999 timeframe, BTW.

If this is a legitimate technology that does in fact, exist outside of the conspiracy worldview, why isn't there more information on it outside of those sites? I realize that simply relying on volume of information returned from a search engine is a little facetious, but come on. From everything I've read this was never out of the experimental and testing phase in 2001. Why would they go to all the trouble of rigging the WTC with a compound that hadn't been tested on that scale? If it had been, it'd be used all over the place by now.

Oh, wait. I guess the very existence of the stuff is secret squirrel and the formula is in a Pentagon archive right next to the 500mpg carbouretor the government secured to keep of the market for the benefit of the big oil companies.

HENTAI DOUKYUSEI JP · 30th December 2008, 11:00 PM

Originally Posted by beachnut

How cool! You have made pizza boxes out of steel beams and added office furniture and stuff to make a model?

Or is the cheese the concrete?

What is the pepperoni?

Your grandkids will see your idiotic ideas online forever more. How sad to know granddad is a physics failure proven by insane posts with kids jumping on beds to explain why you don’t understand physics, structures, or anything about 9/11.

Exactly!
These idiots don't see what they are actually doing to themselves.

JoeyDonuts · 30th December 2008, 11:03 PM

From the experiment:

Quote:

The inner walls of a lexane tube were coated with nanothermite slurry.

From my personal experience with slurry - which is limited to making masa flour slurry for thickening my Kick Ass Chili recipe - I can tell you that it ain't a gel and you'd have a hard time spraying it on anything.

To be fair, only this specific experiment mentioned using a slurry. I haven't seen anything on the alleged development at LLNL who may have gone with a totally different approach altogether.

T.A.M. · 31st December 2008, 04:05 AM

Originally Posted by 3bodyproblem

This is the stupidest thing I have seen posted in regards to 9/11 in a very long time. Without being deliberately idiotic, I can't see anyone making a statement like this.

I agree. Heiwa, with that statement, definitely wins this months "Maximum stupidity in minimal wordage" award.

I love the "simply" part, and the "evaporated instantaneously". What is this "War of the Worlds" time?

TAM

Wolrab · 31st December 2008, 07:36 AM

Originally Posted by Arus808

can anyone show me footage of the cables that were attached to the building so they could pull it down?

The cables were in every single wall all the way to the penthouses. They were the electrical cables that ran to the substation beneath WTC7. The only purpose of the substation was to power a gigantic winch to pull down the building if a situation ever presented itself that TPTB felt reasonably sure they could get away with it.They would have got away with it too, if it wasn't for those meddling kids.

Trojan · 31st December 2008, 07:43 AM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

Of course you do not see any cutter charges or sol-gel nanothermites sprayed on the columns in the linked video.

Could you perhaps produce any photo of a thermite cutter charge of the type you allege to have been used or so gel nanothermite sprayed on any structure? it would be interesting to see if these items exist and function outside of the truther world.

Wolrab · 31st December 2008, 08:00 AM

Originally Posted by Trojan

Could you perhaps produce any photo of a thermite cutter charge of the type you allege to have been used or so gel nanothermite sprayed on any structure? it would be interesting to see if these items exist and function outside of the truther world.

They were smuggled in in pizza boxes which then simply vaporized. Case closed!

Jonnyclueless · 31st December 2008, 09:05 AM

Don't be silly. They used nanocables.

30th December 2008, 01:18 AM	#1
Heiwa Banned Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,149	How WTC 7 was pulled down It is today quite simple to conclude how WTC7 was pulled down on 9/11! According NIST Final report of the WTC7 collapse http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201A.pdf (20 November 2008) pp 47-48 one explanation is: "The probable collapse sequence that caused the global collapse of WTC 7 was initiated by the buckling of Column 79 … The buckling of Column 79 led to a vertical progression of floor failures up to the east penthouse and to the buckling of Columns 80 and 81. An east to west horizontal progression of interior column buckling followed due to loss of lateral support to adjacent columns, forces exerted by falling debris, and load redistribution from other buckled columns. … Global collapse occurred as the entire building above the buckled region moved downward as a single unit." However, NIST has agreed/confirmed the finding that the upper part of WTC7 free falls (acceleration 9.82 m/s²) for 2.25 seconds during the collapse, i.e. there is no support/resistance of the upper part above floor 16, when it displaces downward abt 32 meters. See e.g. figure 3.15 in the report. What a free fall drop is, is explained at http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=gC44L0-2zL8 . NIST suggests that this free fall displacement was initiated by failure of Column no. 79 between floors 11/13 followed by a vertical and horizontal progression of failures (no details of course except some strange figures) below floor 16 that apparently removed all support/resistance of the upper part for 32 meters vertically down at one side only and the complete structure horizontally. But now the problem! A free falling upper part of WTC7 (above floor 16) does not apply any load at all on the structure below floor 16! A free falling mass does not apply any force on anything! So how can the upper part/mass above floor 16 damage the lower part below floor 16 as suggested by NIST during these 2.25 seconds? What kind of structural analysis is done ... when no loads are applied? Furthermore - NIST suggests that the upper part/mass deforms itself during these 2.25 seconds ... when no forces at all are applied to it (all masses of the upper part are in free fall!). Same question ... how can a free fall upper part/mass deform? NIST has been asked these questions ... and could not reply! Thus the NIST WTC 7 report is of no value. The NIST statement on page 57 - "Computer simulations of … the structural collapse can be used to predict a complex degradation and collapse of a building", has no foundation in the case of WTC7. NIST has not done a correct job! The WTC 7 structure does not collapse as shown in figures 3.10-14 due to removing a part of Column no. 79. Quite easy for anybody to verify! No loads are applied on anything by a free falling mass! An explanation how the 24 core columns could suddenly 'disappear' to produce free fall of the structure above is given at http://www.journalof911studies.com/v...and_Nano-1.pdf . Thus, the 24 core columns below floor 16 were simply simultaneously burnt off using, e.g. sol-gel nanothermites sprayed on the columns that then evaporated (!) instantaneously. That explains why no lower (below floor 16) core columns are found in the debris of WTC7 (and that the pull down of WTC 7 was an inside job, I am sorry to conclude)!
Heiwa Banned Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,149

30th December 2008, 01:41 AM	#4
Heiwa Banned Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,149	Originally Posted by Jonnyclueless I'd have to see it demonstrated with pizza boxes. It is easy. Just drop (free fall!) a stack of pizza boxes. During the free fall they neither deform, nor destroy anything.
Heiwa Banned Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,149

30th December 2008, 01:44 AM	#5
Heiwa Banned Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,149	Originally Posted by dtugg So it was thermite? Awesome! The case is finally solved after seven years. Wait...weren't you the genius engineer that said it was because of some sort of vacuum effect? Hmmmm..... Thanks for calling me a genius engineer. Yes, when the thermite burns very quickly it uses oxygen mainly in the gel itself but also in the surrounding air that creates a temporary and local under pressure (not vacuum) that assists in the pull down.
Heiwa Banned Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,149

30th December 2008, 04:54 AM	#10
Troy wins Student Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 33	Originally Posted by Heiwa But now the problem! A free falling upper part of WTC7 (above floor 16) does not apply any load at all on the structure below floor 16! A free falling mass does not apply any force on anything! So how can the upper part/mass above floor 16 damage the lower part below floor 16 as suggested by NIST during these 2.25 seconds? What kind of structural analysis is done ... when no loads are applied? Furthermore - NIST suggests that the upper part/mass deforms itself during these 2.25 seconds ... when no forces at all are applied to it (all masses of the upper part are in free fall!). Same question ... how can a free fall upper part/mass deform? NIST has been asked these questions ... and could not reply! Thus the NIST WTC 7 report is of no value. Not to let the new guy humor you or anything but give us a frickin' timeframe here. When did these columns evaporate. Why do they give this away?? Were they in sequence, did they decide to evaporate them on one side first. Were they blowing them up all day with bombs, seemingly for no reason other than for investigooglers to uncover on the internet? Seems to me like you're implying they evaporated the columns on one side after failure initiation. Which is a really, really bad way to demolish a building.
Troy wins Student Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 33

30th December 2008, 06:10 AM	#12
ferd burfle Critical Thinker Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Just short of Zeta II Reticuli Posts: 346	Originally Posted by Heiwa Yes, when the thermite burns very quickly it uses oxygen mainly in the gel itself but also in the surrounding air that creates a temporary and local under pressure (not vacuum) that assists in the pull down. Let's see, the thermite reaction is Fe2O3 + 2Al -> 2Fe + Al2O3 + Heat So it looks like there's no net consumption of oxygen. But we do get heat, lots of it. And the last I knew, heating gases makes them expand, not contract. Oh, by the way, sol-gel is a process by which you make make something, typically a ceramic. The finished product of a sol gel process is not a gel. By my count, that's about two and a half fails. If you have a day job, say flipping burgers, I suggest you hold onto it for dear life. Regards, Ferd
	__________________ Paranoia...(is) fundamentally egocentric, and every conspiracy theory serves in some way to aggrandize the believer---William Gibson, Zero History

30th December 2008, 01:19 AM	#2
Jonnyclueless Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 5,360	I'd have to see it demonstrated with pizza boxes.

30th December 2008, 01:23 AM	#3
dtugg Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: NWO headquarters Posts: 7,898	So it was thermite? Awesome! The case is finally solved after seven years. Wait...weren't you the genius engineer that said it was because of some sort of vacuum effect? Hmmmm.....

30th December 2008, 01:44 AM	#6
dtugg Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: NWO headquarters Posts: 7,898	Originally Posted by Heiwa It is easy. Just drop (free fall!) a stack of pizza boxes. During the free fall they neither deform, nor destroy anything. I just got a two matchbox cars and crashed them into each other as hard as I can. Neither were deformed whatsoever. That must mean that every single car accident is an inside job! Thank for illuminating me, I never realized! Seriously, Heiwa, are you actually insane or are you just messing with us?

30th December 2008, 01:49 AM	#7
dtugg Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: NWO headquarters Posts: 7,898	Originally Posted by Heiwa Thanks for calling me a genius engineer. Yes, when the thermite burns very quickly it uses oxygen mainly in the gel itself but also in the surrounding air that creates a temporary and local under pressure (not vacuum) that assists in the pull down. Cool. I await to see the calculations of the pressure burning thermite can produce and the calculations that show that said pressure can help destroy a large skyscraper. Thank you, genius engineer, for revealing the truth to us sheeple after seven years. What would we ever do without you?

30th December 2008, 05:41 AM	#11
Dr Adequate Banned Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Waiting Long Enough By The River Posts: 17,897	Originally Posted by Heiwa It is today quite simple to conclude how WTC7 was pulled down on 9/11! According NIST Final report of the WTC7 collapse http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201A.pdf (20 November 2008) pp 47-48 one explanation is: "The probable collapse sequence that caused the global collapse of WTC 7 was initiated by the buckling of Column 79 … The buckling of Column 79 led to a vertical progression of floor failures up to the east penthouse and to the buckling of Columns 80 and 81. An east to west horizontal progression of interior column buckling followed due to loss of lateral support to adjacent columns, forces exerted by falling debris, and load redistribution from other buckled columns. … Global collapse occurred as the entire building above the buckled region moved downward as a single unit." However, NIST has agreed/confirmed the finding that the upper part of WTC7 free falls (acceleration 9.82 m/s²) for 2.25 seconds during the collapse, i.e. there is no support/resistance of the upper part above floor 16, when it displaces downward abt 32 meters. See e.g. figure 3.15 in the report. What a free fall drop is, is explained at http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=gC44L0-2zL8 . NIST suggests that this free fall displacement was initiated by failure of Column no. 79 between floors 11/13 followed by a vertical and horizontal progression of failures (no details of course except some strange figures) below floor 16 that apparently removed all support/resistance of the upper part for 32 meters vertically down at one side only and the complete structure horizontally. But now the problem! A free falling upper part of WTC7 (above floor 16) does not apply any load at all on the structure below floor 16! A free falling mass does not apply any force on anything! So how can the upper part/mass above floor 16 damage the lower part below floor 16 as suggested by NIST during these 2.25 seconds? What kind of structural analysis is done ... when no loads are applied? Furthermore - NIST suggests that the upper part/mass deforms itself during these 2.25 seconds ... when no forces at all are applied to it (all masses of the upper part are in free fall!). Same question ... how can a free fall upper part/mass deform? NIST has been asked these questions ... and could not reply! You mean you emailed them this gibberish and they ignored it? I'm not surprised.

30th December 2008, 06:32 AM	#13
A W Smith Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Central Jersey Posts: 7,031	Only the exterior shell fell at near free fall acceleration for 2.25 seconds. Not the core. The core collapsed first as observed by the east mechanical penthouse collapse. And you know that.
	__________________ 911 resource site by Mark Roberts http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home Gravy: Christopher7; You are a Basking Shark in a sea of ignorance. Galileo:The jury said I didn't have any mental defects or diseases, they declared me 100% sane. Has a jury ever declared you sane? Don’t get me lol’n off my chesterfield dude.

30th December 2008, 06:49 AM	#14
JimBenArm Based on a true story! Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 12,967	Originally Posted by A W Smith Only the exterior shell fell at near free fall acceleration for 2.25 seconds. Not the core. The core collapsed first as observed by the east mechanical penthouse collapse. And you know that. (bolding mine) Never, ever assume they know anything. You will be wrong more often than not. Especially with the crop of "truth seekers" we have around here now.
	__________________ *"JimBenArm is right"* Hokulele Mom

30th December 2008, 06:50 AM	#15
Troy wins Student Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 33	Maybe you should be nicer to NIST, Heiwa after all, they would 'know what's going on', right? And were probably just told to lie to you Invite Sunder around for tea. Maybe something will let slip about what NIST 'really' found about WTC7. Trust me...can't fail
Troy wins Student Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 33

30th December 2008, 07:46 AM	#16
nicepants Graduate Poster Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 1,720	"pull"? Originally Posted by Heiwa It is today quite simple to conclude how WTC7 was pulled down on 9/11! Nothing in your post mentioned anything to do with the definition of the word "pull".
	__________________ Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen -Einstein

30th December 2008, 08:53 AM	#18
Drudgewire Critical Doofus Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 9,434	Originally Posted by nicepants Nothing in your post mentioned anything to do with the definition of the word "pull". Like "truth," "proof" and "evidence," "pull" has a definition for twoofers different than it does for everyone else on the planet.
	__________________ "You post a lie, it is proven 100% false, you move the goalposts and post yet another lie and it continues on around till we're back to the original lie as if it will somehow become true if it's re-iterated again. The same misquotes over and over again. The same hindsight bias, appeals to authority, etc." -lapman describing every twoofer on the internet

30th December 2008, 09:00 AM	#19
T.A.M. Keeper of the Kool-Vax Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: The Far East...of Canada Posts: 20,816	How frustrating it must be to know the truth, that explosives were used, and to have no one listen or give a ****. oh well...moving on, the paint on my wall is drying quite nicely. TAM

30th December 2008, 09:49 AM	#20
Corsair 115 Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Tranquility Base Posts: 8,556	Originally Posted by dtugg Seriously, Heiwa, are you actually insane or are you just messing with us? Why couldn't it be both?
	__________________ "We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win."

30th December 2008, 10:03 AM	#21
phunk Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,908	Originally Posted by Heiwa Thus, the 24 core columns below floor 16 were simply simultaneously burnt off using, e.g. sol-gel nanothermites sprayed on the columns that then evaporated (!) instantaneously. That explains why no lower (below floor 16) core columns are found in the debris of WTC7 (and that the pull down of WTC 7 was an inside job, I am sorry to conclude)! LOL. You now think they evaporated 24 core columns almost instantly?
phunk Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,908

30th December 2008, 10:14 AM	#22
1337m4n Alphanumeric Anonymous Stick Man Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 3,499	Originally Posted by phunk LOL. You now think they evaporated 24 core columns almost instantly? Thermite has magic powers and can do anything a Truther wants it to do. Hey Heiwa, why don't you quote the part from NIST where they talk about free-fall; the PDF isn't loading. Maybe we'll learn something.
	__________________ http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting...2b728514ea.gif "The evidence that the attacks of 9/11 were an inside job just keeps not coming in." --pomeroo

30th December 2008, 10:41 AM	#23
Jonnyclueless Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 5,360	Heiwa is right. NIST also could answer my questions about the space beams involved. Thus proving the building was brought down by space beams.

30th December 2008, 11:54 AM	#24
Quad4_72 AI-EE-YAH! Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: USA Posts: 5,830	I don't remember cables being attached to WTC7 anywhere.
	__________________ Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken

30th December 2008, 12:03 PM	#25
Sword_Of_Truth Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 11,497	Originally Posted by Heiwa However, NIST has agreed/confirmed the finding that the upper part of WTC7 free falls (acceleration 9.82 m/s²) for 2.25 seconds during the collapse, This is why the twoof movement is dead. They have gone from claiming that all of WTC7 came down at free fall throughout the entire collapse during to conceding that only part of WTC7 came down at free fall for part of the collapse. That even a multi-stundie nominee and poster child for scientific illiteracy is willing to give up the ghost on what was once the most infallible twoofer dogma about twooferdoms holiest shrine just further proves the intellectual full retreat of twooferdom. This is like getting the catholic church to concede that the pope is a mortal man and thus might occasionally talk completely out his ass.

30th December 2008, 12:11 PM	#26
beachnut Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 19,891	Originally Posted by Heiwa It is easy. Just drop (free fall!) a stack of pizza boxes. During the free fall they neither deform, nor destroy anything. How cool! You have made pizza boxes out of steel beams and added office furniture and stuff to make a model? Or is the cheese the concrete? What is the pepperoni? Your grandkids will see your idiotic ideas online forever more. How sad to know granddad is a physics failure proven by insane posts with kids jumping on beds to explain why you don’t understand physics, structures, or anything about 9/11.

30th December 2008, 01:12 PM	#27
UNLoVedRebel Hard Knocks Doctorate Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: School of Hard Knocks Posts: 5,507	Originally Posted by Heiwa Of course you do not see any cutter charges or sol-gel nanothermites sprayed on the columns in the linked video. I just feel sorry for NYFD chief Nigro who believes the NIST WTC7 report explains the total collapse. Probably he was not aware of the free fall, etc.? You can of course do structural analysis of a free fall object; all the stresses inside it are zero! No loads are applied on such a structure. But according NIST the structure deforms! Quite magic! Actually clear evidence that NIST is 100% incompetent to carry out the structural damage analysis. So, you want to tell us WHY we don't see any "cutter charges" or "sol-gel nanothermies" inside tower 7 on 9/11. Because, you predicted they would be there, and they weren't. So.........................
	__________________ "All the Officialiers here typically have rancid alien avatars or else some kind of violent military-type avatar. Once again affirming my contention that 9/11 Officialiers are the most violent, murderous, group of people in the United States. Both statistically confirmed, but also anecdotally affirmed in almost every case of active pro-Officialers." - FloydGoethe

30th December 2008, 03:54 PM	#28
jhunter1163 Beer-Swilling Semiliterate Moderator Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Room 118, Bohemian Grove Marriott Posts: 15,557	Seems like a good place for this... Originally Posted by jhunter1163 Tune: Barry Mann's "Who Put The Bomp" Oh, I'd like to meet the guy Who dropped the bomb That made ol' Dylan think "conspiracy"... (chorus) Who put the bomb, in the Pent-a-Pentagon? Who put the nan in the nano-nano-thermite? Who put the HOP in the HOP-LIHOP-MIHOP? Who put the dip in the dip-a-dip(rule8)? Who was that man? I'd like to kick his (rule8) He made our Dylan think about CT... When ol' Dylan heard Bomb-ba-ba-bomb-ba-bomb-a-bomb-bomb Every word went right into his heart And when Jones heard them saying Nan-a-nan-a-nano-nano-thermite He said "I've got to play a part".. So... (repeat chorus) Each time he's alone Chingity-chingity-chingity-chingity-ching Sets ol' Dylan's heart all aglow And when LC recruits a Dip-da-dip-a-dip-dip-a-dip-da-dip He tumbles down the rabbit hole.. So.. (repeat chorus)

30th December 2008, 06:49 PM	#29
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Spanaway WA Posts: 18,613	It free-fell for 2.5 seconds. whoop. Then it met resistance. Why would it have to crush things that were already falling at free-fall? Has anyone pointed out that there are gaps in your reasoning? BTW, has anyone ever seen footage of the collapse from the south?

30th December 2008, 07:01 PM	#30
Arus808 Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 6,202	can anyone show me footage of the cables that were attached to the building so they could pull it down?
Arus808 Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 6,202	__________________ Back home with a new sunburn...I look like a tomato. “Life may begin at 30, but it doesn’t get real interesting until about 150.” “Most motorcycle problems are caused by the nut that connects the handlebars to the saddle.”

30th December 2008, 08:20 PM	#31
Gord_in_Toronto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 13,409	Originally Posted by Arus808 can anyone show me footage of the cables that were attached to the building so they could pull it down? Of course not -- they were invisible stealth technology cables. But I do have a photo of a similar cable: o===================o
	__________________ "Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick

30th December 2008, 09:22 PM	#32
Furcifer miscreant Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: hohm Posts: 13,379	Originally Posted by Heiwa Thus, the 24 core columns below floor 16 were simply simultaneously burnt off using, e.g. sol-gel nanothermites sprayed on the columns that then evaporated (!) instantaneously. This is the stupidest thing I have seen posted in regards to 9/11 in a very long time. Without being deliberately idiotic, I can't see anyone making a statement like this.

30th December 2008, 10:57 PM	#33
JoeyDonuts Frequencies Not Known To Normals Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Parts Unknown Posts: 10,636	An interesting insight onto thermite googling: Google "thermite" and you're presented with mostly reputable articles about its chemical makeup and a few on its construction. Two on the top page deal with 9/11 - one from whatreallyhappened.com and the other is a 9/11 debunker site. Google "sol gel nanothermite" and the overwhelming volume is all 9/11 conspiracy sites. The only semi-reputable link returned is this: http://aiche.confex.com/aiche/2007/p...act_104182.htm This appears to be the abstract of a paper written on experiments with sol-gel nanothermite filed in 2007. Notice the Picatinny Arsenal referenced at the top. I'm not really adept at reading these sorts of things, so I'm not sure to what degree the Army was involved in the experiment. Most likely it was an "official observer." This seems to clash with other reports of it being developed at LLNL in the 1998-1999 timeframe, BTW. If this is a legitimate technology that does in fact, exist outside of the conspiracy worldview, why isn't there more information on it outside of those sites? I realize that simply relying on volume of information returned from a search engine is a little facetious, but come on. From everything I've read this was never out of the experimental and testing phase in 2001. Why would they go to all the trouble of rigging the WTC with a compound that hadn't been tested on that scale? If it had been, it'd be used all over the place by now. Oh, wait. I guess the very existence of the stuff is secret squirrel and the formula is in a Pentagon archive right next to the 500mpg carbouretor the government secured to keep of the market for the benefit of the big oil companies.
	__________________ _{EXIT STAGE LEFT! EXIT STAGE RIGHT! THERE IS NO PLACE TO RUN; ALL THE FUSES IN THE EXIT SIGNS HAVE BEEN BURNED OUT!} Last edited by JoeyDonuts; 30th December 2008 at 10:59 PM.

30th December 2008, 11:00 PM	#34
HENTAI DOUKYUSEI JP Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 460	Originally Posted by beachnut How cool! You have made pizza boxes out of steel beams and added office furniture and stuff to make a model? Or is the cheese the concrete? What is the pepperoni? Your grandkids will see your idiotic ideas online forever more. How sad to know granddad is a physics failure proven by insane posts with kids jumping on beds to explain why you don’t understand physics, structures, or anything about 9/11. Exactly! These idiots don't see what they are actually doing to themselves.

30th December 2008, 11:03 PM	#35
JoeyDonuts Frequencies Not Known To Normals Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Parts Unknown Posts: 10,636	From the experiment: Quote: The inner walls of a lexane tube were coated with nanothermite slurry. From my personal experience with slurry - which is limited to making masa flour slurry for thickening my Kick Ass Chili recipe - I can tell you that it ain't a gel and you'd have a hard time spraying it on anything. To be fair, only this specific experiment mentioned using a slurry. I haven't seen anything on the alleged development at LLNL who may have gone with a totally different approach altogether.
	__________________ _{EXIT STAGE LEFT! EXIT STAGE RIGHT! THERE IS NO PLACE TO RUN; ALL THE FUSES IN THE EXIT SIGNS HAVE BEEN BURNED OUT!}

31st December 2008, 04:05 AM	#36
T.A.M. Keeper of the Kool-Vax Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: The Far East...of Canada Posts: 20,816	Originally Posted by 3bodyproblem This is the stupidest thing I have seen posted in regards to 9/11 in a very long time. Without being deliberately idiotic, I can't see anyone making a statement like this. I agree. Heiwa, with that statement, definitely wins this months "Maximum stupidity in minimal wordage" award. I love the "simply" part, and the "evaporated instantaneously". What is this "War of the Worlds" time? TAM

31st December 2008, 07:36 AM	#37
Wolrab Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: The Beautiful Finger Lakes Posts: 1,708	Originally Posted by Arus808 can anyone show me footage of the cables that were attached to the building so they could pull it down? The cables were in every single wall all the way to the penthouses. They were the electrical cables that ran to the substation beneath WTC7. The only purpose of the substation was to power a gigantic winch to pull down the building if a situation ever presented itself that TPTB felt reasonably sure they could get away with it.They would have got away with it too, if it wasn't for those meddling kids.

31st December 2008, 07:43 AM	#38
Trojan Critical Thinker Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 407	Originally Posted by Heiwa Of course you do not see any cutter charges or sol-gel nanothermites sprayed on the columns in the linked video. Could you perhaps produce any photo of a thermite cutter charge of the type you allege to have been used or so gel nanothermite sprayed on any structure? it would be interesting to see if these items exist and function outside of the truther world.