Anyone Seen This Picture

BigBird · 13th July 2009, 08:25 PM

I havent seen this one before.. Appears to be from ground zero..

EDIT:

Let me clarify.. I am just trying to get an idea what caused the steel on the left on the photo to look as it does... Doesnt appear to be cut with a torch... I'm not trying to play games or anything, just seen it so many times elsewhere I forgot I needed to be so specific...

Gravy · 13th July 2009, 08:32 PM

Wreckage. What unusual aspects do you wish to bring to our attention?

BigBird · 13th July 2009, 08:35 PM

Originally Posted by Gravy

Wreckage. What unusual aspects do you wish to bring to our attention?

Its the one piece on the left, looks a bit odd.. Think it was from the collapse or from the cleanup? Someone explain this one to me.

Pi_314 · 13th July 2009, 08:35 PM

I think it's a picture of the small particles of steel that were left over from the DEW weapon. I hear those particles of steel were reduced to specks as small as a thousands pounds.

BigBird · 13th July 2009, 08:38 PM

Originally Posted by Pi_314

I think it's a picture of the small particles of steel that were left over from the DEW weapon. I hear those particles of steel were reduced to specks as small as a thousands pounds.

Thanks... :roll eyes:

triforcharity · 13th July 2009, 08:42 PM

BigBird,

The one on the left is not cut. That looks to me like it is broken from untold amounts of stress. Notice it matches the one on the lower left?? The round sections is where the bolts USED to be. This is my conclusion.
But, its most certainly not sut with anything torch like. Its too jagged. A 10 year old with an Oxy-Act torch could cut better than that.

But, I have never seen this picture before. Its a great pic.

Linkey???

Gravy · 13th July 2009, 08:43 PM

Originally Posted by BigBird

Its the one piece on the left, looks a bit odd.. Think it was from the collapse or from the cleanup? Someone explain this one to me.

Sigh. What looks "a bit odd" about it? You should be old enough to know this, but I'll say it anyway: be specific.

BigBird · 13th July 2009, 08:46 PM

Originally Posted by Gravy

Sigh. What looks "a bit odd" about it? You should be old enough to know this, but I'll say it anyway: be specific.

Didn't think I needed to specify, I figured it was obvious, and it seems as though triforcharity knew what i was talking about... cut me some slack...

Sword_Of_Truth · 13th July 2009, 08:47 PM

Originally Posted by BigBird

http://bocadigital.smugmug.com/photos/10697258-L.jpg

I havent seen this one before.. Appears to be from ground zero.. What do you suspect it is?

A grave site with 2200 innocent people, 400 heroes who tried to save them and 10 buttholes who are the only ones who deserve to be there.

BigBird · 13th July 2009, 08:48 PM

Originally Posted by triforcharity

BigBird,

The one on the left is not cut. That looks to me like it is broken from untold amounts of stress. Notice it matches the one on the lower left?? The round sections is where the bolts USED to be. This is my conclusion.
But, its most certainly not sut with anything torch like. Its too jagged. A 10 year old with an Oxy-Act torch could cut better than that.

But, I have never seen this picture before. Its a great pic.

Linkey???

I'm not sure where it came from... Its been linked a million times over at another forum... The twoofers always ask us to explain it, and I am not certain what would make a beam look as such...

Also, you said it matches the one on the lower left... Unfortunately I'm not sure what you are referencing...

triforcharity · 13th July 2009, 08:49 PM

Easy Bigbird, Gravy's on our side.

I am not too certain if thats a column or a beam. It looks to be a beam, but im not sure. maybe some kind of horizontal bracing?? One of the engineers here might be able to shed some light on it though.

BigBird · 13th July 2009, 08:54 PM

Originally Posted by triforcharity

Easy Bigbird, Gravy's on our side.

I am not too certain if thats a column or a beam. It looks to be a beam, but im not sure. maybe some kind of horizontal bracing?? One of the engineers here might be able to shed some light on it though.

I know, I just figured it was obvious.. My mistake... Thanks for your input...

Once again, I made the mistake of using 'beam' as a general term for 'big chunk of steel'... I have not a clue if it was a beam or a column...

Gravy · 13th July 2009, 08:54 PM

Originally Posted by BigBird

Didn't think I needed to specify, I figured it was obvious, and it seems as though triforcharity knew what i was talking about... cut me some slack...

What you wish me to see is not obvious to me. I see a typical photo of tower debris that happens to be overexposed and oversaturated. The piece at top left is a torn web that connected perimeter columns. I see nothing unusual about it.

Brainster · 13th July 2009, 08:56 PM

I'm looking at it and I don't have a clue as to what it is. It's certainly not a column or a beam; it looks fairly flat. Possibly a floor pan?

BigBird · 13th July 2009, 09:00 PM

Originally Posted by Gravy

What you wish me to see is not obvious to me. I see a typical photo of tower debris that happens to be overexposed and oversaturated. The piece at top left is a torn web that connected perimeter columns. I see nothing unusual about it.

Thanks for the explanation.. Sorry for the ambiguity, I dont mean to be a pain in the arse...

Would you mind explaining what you meant by the part I made bold?

R.Mackey · 13th July 2009, 09:03 PM

No, not a floor pan. Most likely a spandrel. They were bolted together in such a fashion, and were fairly thin. No mystery here whatsoever.

There's a similar object in Figure B-5 of the FEMA report, and a more intact one in Figure 3-3, 3-13, and 3-52 of NCSTAR1-3C, among others.

Anyone with interest really should read the NIST Report. NCSTAR1, 1-5A, and 1-3 are where I would recommend one start. Lots of pictures, not so much math.

alienentity · 13th July 2009, 09:20 PM

Originally Posted by BigBird

Thanks for the explanation.. Sorry for the ambiguity, I dont mean to be a pain in the arse...

Would you mind explaining what you meant by the part I made bold?

Hey BB, I don't know what it is, but it made me think of a question for you. What do you make of the claims that the steel was turned to dust, or 'dustified' (in WoodSpeak)?

Does this stuff look like dust? I don't think so.

triforcharity · 13th July 2009, 09:20 PM

Thanks. I wasn't sure. I had to reboot my computer, but here is the photo I made.

Yes, its MS Paint, but it works.

Anyway, see the big checkerboard looking things in the pile?? Those are the exterrior columns. They were quite big, and very heavy. Saw one of those bent in half like a toothpick. It really was amazing the amount of destruction that happened.

Anyway, I never will claim to be an expert on steel, but firefighting, Yes.

Just a guess though.

Gravy · 13th July 2009, 09:22 PM

Here's a photo I took of a similar spandrel piece. I hope it looks less mysterious when the image isn't overexposed and oversaturated.

beachnut · 13th July 2009, 09:26 PM

The building was ripped apart with the energy of over 130 TONS of TNT per tower due to a gravity collapse! Someone was right this is debris, wreckage from a very intense, a gigantic kinetic energy event! Has anyone witnessed an event where the energy was this great? 911, 19 dolts fooled by a hateful rich kid, murdered people by killing 8 pilots and crashing 4 planes.

BigBird · 13th July 2009, 09:31 PM

Originally Posted by alienentity

Hey BB, I don't know what it is, but it made me think of a question for you. What do you make of the claims that the steel was turned to dust, or 'dustified' (in WoodSpeak)?

Does this stuff look like dust? I don't think so.

LOL The only claims I have heard regarding this were in reference to the "spire" that was a portion of the core that appeared to turn into dust.. It was obvious that the video was simply just a big piece of metal covered in dust from the collapse, that fell straight down and the dust that was covering it lingered in the air for a bit, as one would expect....

I don't believe for a second that any steel was "dustified"... That is simply laughable... I'm not THAT dumb...

BigBird · 13th July 2009, 09:32 PM

Originally Posted by Gravy

Here's a photo I took of a similar spandrel piece. I hope it looks less mysterious when the image isn't overexposed and oversaturated.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting...c0799514fb.jpg

very helpful! Thanks alot!

sylvan8798 · 13th July 2009, 11:47 PM

Originally Posted by BigBird

http://bocadigital.smugmug.com/photos/10697258-L.jpg

I havent seen this one before.. Appears to be from ground zero..

EDIT:

Let me clarify.. I am just trying to get an idea what caused the steel on the left on the photo to look as it does... Doesnt appear to be cut with a torch... I'm not trying to play games or anything, just seen it so many times elsewhere I forgot I needed to be so specific...

One important thing to note about this photo, BB, is that the failure happened through the weakest part (the part of the connection plate with the least amount of steel). It has pulled the plate apart in a combination of shear forces exactly where you would expect it to fail. Obviously not CUT intentionally at this location. If things were cut intentionally here and there, and didn't fail because of lack of strength of the structure under the loads, then you would not have things like this showing up.

T.A.M. · 14th July 2009, 03:43 AM

Interesting, never knew about these "spandrels" myself. Were they steel as well (they look it)?

TAM

Newtons Bit · 14th July 2009, 06:17 AM

The failure mode of the picture at the top is what is known as "block shear". It's what happens when the bolts don't fail, but the steel plate does.

BasqueArch · 14th July 2009, 06:33 AM

Originally Posted by BigBird

http://bocadigital.smugmug.com/photos/10697258-L.jpg

I havent seen this one before.. Appears to be from ground zero..

EDIT:

Let me clarify.. I am just trying to get an idea what caused the steel on the left on the photo to look as it does... Doesnt appear to be cut with a torch... I'm not trying to play games or anything, just seen it so many times elsewhere I forgot I needed to be so specific...

Gusset splice plate every third column at each floor connecting adjacent exterior columns, two rows of connecting bolts. Directly below this you see the similar gusset splice plate from the floor below before the bolts sheared the connecting plate. To the top right of the pic note the gussets at each floor, still attached.

Note the four column to column base connecting bolts at 36 feet oc , hand access at each column inside at 6 feet above every third floor, floors bolts also sheared off. This is why the columns toppled outward, too slender, too great unbraced length after floors collapsed past the columns. Like balancing a stick at the end of another stick.

Dumb All Over · 14th July 2009, 07:05 AM

Originally Posted by BigBird

I havent seen this one before..

Originally Posted by BigBird

... Its been linked a million times over at another forum... The twoofers always ask us to explain it...

Something here is not quite passing the smell test.

leftysergeant · 14th July 2009, 08:38 AM

It sort of looks to me as though someone had altered the colors to achieve an appearance that there was some sort of chemical or exotic energy involved in the damage. Yes, it is definitely from the perimeter wall. In this piece, all of the bolts are torn out, indicating that two panels of joined columns were moved away from each other.

But notice that in Gravy's example, sometimes the bolt failed, sometimes the plate. Such randomness is not entirely consistant with demolition charges.

Brainster · 14th July 2009, 08:50 AM

Originally Posted by T.A.M.

Interesting, never knew about these "spandrels" myself. Were they steel as well (they look it)?

TAM

Yes, they are the pieces that connect the columns. Much thinner than the columns themselves. If you look at the columns near the top right in the photo you can see the spandrels between them.

T.A.M. · 14th July 2009, 10:42 AM

Yah I thought so. I got the impression that someone was subtly trying to allude to the fact that in the original OP, the picture gives a slight impression of metal that was melted (partially at least), and hence alluding to the "molten steel" argument. It has not DEvolved into that yet, so maybe I was wrong.

TAM

BigBird · 14th July 2009, 11:31 AM

Originally Posted by Dumb All Over

Something here is not quite passing the smell test.

What I meant to say in the OP was I have not seen this one discussed here before.

What are you getting at? How is this relevant?

BigBird · 14th July 2009, 11:37 AM

Originally Posted by T.A.M.

Yah I thought so. I got the impression that someone was subtly trying to allude to the fact that in the original OP, the picture gives a slight impression of metal that was melted (partially at least), and hence alluding to the "molten steel" argument. It has not DEvolved into that yet, so maybe I was wrong.

TAM

I don't buy the molten steel argument at all... 9 out of 10 things can easily be explained and understood by myself when talking to twoofers, but every now and then they ask me questions that I didn't consider and am not sure of... That's why I post here.. I am NOT a twoofer, I am just trying to get all the info I can, and I think this forum is the best place for it...

I believe they are inferring when they post this picture that its evidence of thermite/molten steel/etc or very high temperatures not consistent with the fires... I know thats crap from all the other evidence, or lack thereof, I just want to know why.

alienentity · 14th July 2009, 11:40 AM

Originally Posted by Newtons Bit

The failure mode of the picture at the top is what is known as "block shear". It's what happens when the bolts don't fail, but the steel plate does.

Looks like it was melted by thermite.

Dumb All Over · 14th July 2009, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by BigBird

What I meant to say in the OP was I have not seen this one discussed here before.

You did not say that, however. You did say, "I havent [sic] seen this one before.."

BigBird · 14th July 2009, 12:22 PM

Originally Posted by Dumb All Over

You did not say that, however. You did say, "I havent [sic] seen this one before.."

Fantastic. My mistake.. What the hell is your point?

T.A.M. · 14th July 2009, 12:42 PM

Originally Posted by BigBird

I don't buy the molten steel argument at all... 9 out of 10 things can easily be explained and understood by myself when talking to twoofers, but every now and then they ask me questions that I didn't consider and am not sure of... That's why I post here.. I am NOT a twoofer, I am just trying to get all the info I can, and I think this forum is the best place for it...

I believe they are inferring when they post this picture that its evidence of thermite/molten steel/etc or very high temperatures not consistent with the fires... I know thats crap from all the other evidence, or lack thereof, I just want to know why.

Sorry Bigbird. I should have been more clear. I wasn't insinuating that you believed the argument, but rather that this is the argument and line of thinking that was being alluded to.

In future, to avoid ambiguity and potential suspicions, better to come outright and say what arguments you feel the truthers will use with the picture, and then ask what others think of the picture in relation to that argument.

As you know, they have seen more then there share of vague posts here, that turn out to be nothing more than a truther in disguise, trying to lead them down a garden path.

TAM

Macgyver1968 · 14th July 2009, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

It sort of looks to me as though someone had altered the colors to achieve an appearance that there was some sort of chemical or exotic energy involved in the damage. Yes, it is definitely from the perimeter wall. In this piece, all of the bolts are torn out, indicating that two panels of joined columns were moved away from each other.

But notice that in Gravy's example, sometimes the bolt failed, sometimes the plate. Such randomness is not entirely consistant with demolition charges.

I agree about the wierd looking colors. I'm not sure if it's from the sunlight oversaturating the image, or if someone photoshopped it to make it look like it was red hot. (It's thermite!) But it does look a little strange to me.

T.A.M. · 14th July 2009, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by BigBird

Fantastic. My mistake.. What the hell is your point?

his point is probably similar to mine above.

If you have lurked here long enough, you will know that every few weeks we get someone who joins, claiming to be just asking questions. They post things like this, asking us simply what we think, when in fact they are trying to lead people here a certain way...a truther way so to speak.

So, in a nutshell, you have to be open, frank, and SPECIFIC. Vagueness is seen as an attempt to conceal true intent.

TAM

Dumb All Over · 14th July 2009, 01:37 PM

Originally Posted by BigBird

Fantastic. My mistake.. What the hell is your point?

My point is that had you included the words "discussed here", this thread and the responses here would be much different. It is quite possible the picture in the OP has been discussed here before. Do I know this for a fact? No. Do I care? Only to the point that this thread is a waste if, in fact, the picture has been discussed here before.

You said, "I am NOT a twoofer". I must be honest; whenever I hear that, a huge red flag starts its ascent up the pole. Again, I could be wrong, but never once have I ever heard any of the fine debunkers here say that. The only people that come here to this forum and say, "I am not a truther" are, in fact, truthers. Color me skeptical.

Gravy · 14th July 2009, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

...But notice that in Gravy's example, sometimes the bolt failed, sometimes the plate. Such randomness is not entirely consistant with demolition charges.

Actually, no. Not every hole had a bolt through it. It appears that the bolts pulled through the plate in each case.

13th July 2009, 08:25 PM	#1
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67	Anyone Seen This Picture I havent seen this one before.. Appears to be from ground zero.. EDIT: Let me clarify.. I am just trying to get an idea what caused the steel on the left on the photo to look as it does... Doesnt appear to be cut with a torch... I'm not trying to play games or anything, just seen it so many times elsewhere I forgot I needed to be so specific...
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67	Last edited by BigBird; 13th July 2009 at 08:49 PM.

13th July 2009, 08:32 PM	#2
Gravy Downsitting Citizen Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: In the argyle Posts: 17,136	Wreckage. What unusual aspects do you wish to bring to our attention?
	__________________ "Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links

13th July 2009, 08:35 PM	#3
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67	Originally Posted by Gravy Wreckage. What unusual aspects do you wish to bring to our attention? Its the one piece on the left, looks a bit odd.. Think it was from the collapse or from the cleanup? Someone explain this one to me.
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67

13th July 2009, 08:35 PM	#4
Pi_314 Thinker Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 138	I think it's a picture of the small particles of steel that were left over from the DEW weapon. I hear those particles of steel were reduced to specks as small as a thousands pounds.
Pi_314 Thinker Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 138	Last edited by Pi_314; 13th July 2009 at 08:38 PM.

13th July 2009, 08:38 PM	#5
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67	Originally Posted by Pi_314 I think it's a picture of the small particles of steel that were left over from the DEW weapon. I hear those particles of steel were reduced to specks as small as a thousands pounds. Thanks... :roll eyes:
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67

13th July 2009, 08:42 PM	#6
triforcharity Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: The South! Posts: 12,239	BigBird, The one on the left is not cut. That looks to me like it is broken from untold amounts of stress. Notice it matches the one on the lower left?? The round sections is where the bolts USED to be. This is my conclusion. But, its most certainly not sut with anything torch like. Its too jagged. A 10 year old with an Oxy-Act torch could cut better than that. But, I have never seen this picture before. Its a great pic. Linkey???

13th July 2009, 08:43 PM	#7
Gravy Downsitting Citizen Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: In the argyle Posts: 17,136	Originally Posted by BigBird Its the one piece on the left, looks a bit odd.. Think it was from the collapse or from the cleanup? Someone explain this one to me. Sigh. What looks "a bit odd" about it? You should be old enough to know this, but I'll say it anyway: be specific.
	__________________ "Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links Last edited by Gravy; 13th July 2009 at 08:44 PM.

13th July 2009, 08:46 PM	#8
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67	Originally Posted by Gravy Sigh. What looks "a bit odd" about it? You should be old enough to know this, but I'll say it anyway: be specific. Didn't think I needed to specify, I figured it was obvious, and it seems as though triforcharity knew what i was talking about... cut me some slack...
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67

13th July 2009, 08:47 PM	#9
Sword_Of_Truth Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 11,497	Originally Posted by BigBird http://bocadigital.smugmug.com/photos/10697258-L.jpg I havent seen this one before.. Appears to be from ground zero.. What do you suspect it is? A grave site with 2200 innocent people, 400 heroes who tried to save them and 10 buttholes who are the only ones who deserve to be there.

13th July 2009, 08:48 PM	#10
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67	Originally Posted by triforcharity BigBird, The one on the left is not cut. That looks to me like it is broken from untold amounts of stress. Notice it matches the one on the lower left?? The round sections is where the bolts USED to be. This is my conclusion. But, its most certainly not sut with anything torch like. Its too jagged. A 10 year old with an Oxy-Act torch could cut better than that. But, I have never seen this picture before. Its a great pic. Linkey??? I'm not sure where it came from... Its been linked a million times over at another forum... The twoofers always ask us to explain it, and I am not certain what would make a beam look as such... Also, you said it matches the one on the lower left... Unfortunately I'm not sure what you are referencing...
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67

13th July 2009, 08:49 PM	#11
triforcharity Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: The South! Posts: 12,239	Easy Bigbird, Gravy's on our side. I am not too certain if thats a column or a beam. It looks to be a beam, but im not sure. maybe some kind of horizontal bracing?? One of the engineers here might be able to shed some light on it though.

13th July 2009, 08:54 PM	#12
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67	Originally Posted by triforcharity Easy Bigbird, Gravy's on our side. I am not too certain if thats a column or a beam. It looks to be a beam, but im not sure. maybe some kind of horizontal bracing?? One of the engineers here might be able to shed some light on it though. I know, I just figured it was obvious.. My mistake... Thanks for your input... Once again, I made the mistake of using 'beam' as a general term for 'big chunk of steel'... I have not a clue if it was a beam or a column...
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67

13th July 2009, 08:54 PM	#13
Gravy Downsitting Citizen Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: In the argyle Posts: 17,136	Originally Posted by BigBird Didn't think I needed to specify, I figured it was obvious, and it seems as though triforcharity knew what i was talking about... cut me some slack... What you wish me to see is not obvious to me. I see a typical photo of tower debris that happens to be overexposed and oversaturated. The piece at top left is a torn web that connected perimeter columns. I see nothing unusual about it.
	__________________ "Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links

13th July 2009, 08:56 PM	#14
Brainster Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 10,455	I'm looking at it and I don't have a clue as to what it is. It's certainly not a column or a beam; it looks fairly flat. Possibly a floor pan?
	__________________ My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

13th July 2009, 09:00 PM	#15
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67	Originally Posted by Gravy What you wish me to see is not obvious to me. I see a typical photo of tower debris that happens to be overexposed and oversaturated. The piece at top left is a torn web that connected perimeter columns. I see nothing unusual about it. Thanks for the explanation.. Sorry for the ambiguity, I dont mean to be a pain in the arse... Would you mind explaining what you meant by the part I made bold?
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67

13th July 2009, 09:03 PM	#16
R.Mackey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: The armpit of L.A. Posts: 7,857	No, not a floor pan. Most likely a spandrel. They were bolted together in such a fashion, and were fairly thin. No mystery here whatsoever. There's a similar object in Figure B-5 of the FEMA report, and a more intact one in Figure 3-3, 3-13, and 3-52 of NCSTAR1-3C, among others. Anyone with interest really should read the NIST Report. NCSTAR1, 1-5A, and 1-3 are where I would recommend one start. Lots of pictures, not so much math.
	__________________ "Nothing real can defeat us. Nothing unreal exists." -B. Banzai VT VENIANT OMNES

13th July 2009, 09:20 PM	#17
alienentity Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Somewhere between Here and There Posts: 4,240	Originally Posted by BigBird Thanks for the explanation.. Sorry for the ambiguity, I dont mean to be a pain in the arse... Would you mind explaining what you meant by the part I made bold? Hey BB, I don't know what it is, but it made me think of a question for you. What do you make of the claims that the steel was turned to dust, or 'dustified' (in WoodSpeak)? Does this stuff look like dust? I don't think so.
	__________________ Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!' 000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.' mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'

13th July 2009, 09:22 PM	#19
Gravy Downsitting Citizen Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: In the argyle Posts: 17,136	Here's a photo I took of a similar spandrel piece. I hope it looks less mysterious when the image isn't overexposed and oversaturated.
	__________________ "Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links Last edited by Gravy; 13th July 2009 at 09:24 PM.

13th July 2009, 09:26 PM	#20
beachnut Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 19,911	The building was ripped apart with the energy of over 130 TONS of TNT per tower due to a gravity collapse! Someone was right this is debris, wreckage from a very intense, a gigantic kinetic energy event! Has anyone witnessed an event where the energy was this great? 911, 19 dolts fooled by a hateful rich kid, murdered people by killing 8 pilots and crashing 4 planes.

13th July 2009, 09:31 PM	#21
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67	Originally Posted by alienentity Hey BB, I don't know what it is, but it made me think of a question for you. What do you make of the claims that the steel was turned to dust, or 'dustified' (in WoodSpeak)? Does this stuff look like dust? I don't think so. LOL The only claims I have heard regarding this were in reference to the "spire" that was a portion of the core that appeared to turn into dust.. It was obvious that the video was simply just a big piece of metal covered in dust from the collapse, that fell straight down and the dust that was covering it lingered in the air for a bit, as one would expect.... I don't believe for a second that any steel was "dustified"... That is simply laughable... I'm not THAT dumb...
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67

13th July 2009, 09:32 PM	#22
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67	Originally Posted by Gravy Here's a photo I took of a similar spandrel piece. I hope it looks less mysterious when the image isn't overexposed and oversaturated. http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting...c0799514fb.jpg very helpful! Thanks alot!
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67

13th July 2009, 11:47 PM	#23
sylvan8798 Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 1,512	Originally Posted by BigBird http://bocadigital.smugmug.com/photos/10697258-L.jpg I havent seen this one before.. Appears to be from ground zero.. EDIT: Let me clarify.. I am just trying to get an idea what caused the steel on the left on the photo to look as it does... Doesnt appear to be cut with a torch... I'm not trying to play games or anything, just seen it so many times elsewhere I forgot I needed to be so specific... One important thing to note about this photo, BB, is that the failure happened through the weakest part (the part of the connection plate with the least amount of steel). It has pulled the plate apart in a combination of shear forces exactly where you would expect it to fail. Obviously not CUT intentionally at this location. If things were cut intentionally here and there, and didn't fail because of lack of strength of the structure under the loads, then you would not have things like this showing up.

14th July 2009, 03:43 AM	#24
T.A.M. Keeper of the Kool-Vax Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: The Far East...of Canada Posts: 20,816	Interesting, never knew about these "spandrels" myself. Were they steel as well (they look it)? TAM

14th July 2009, 06:17 AM	#25
Newtons Bit Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 6,920	The failure mode of the picture at the top is what is known as "block shear". It's what happens when the bolts don't fail, but the steel plate does.
Newtons Bit Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 6,920	__________________ "Structural Engineering is the art of molding materials we do not wholly understand into shapes we cannot precisely analyze so as to understand forces we cannot really assess in such a way that the community at large has no reason to suspect the extent of our own ignorance." James E Amrhein My website.

14th July 2009, 06:33 AM	#26
BasqueArch Graduate Poster Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Whispering Glades, Fredonia Posts: 1,376	Originally Posted by BigBird http://bocadigital.smugmug.com/photos/10697258-L.jpg I havent seen this one before.. Appears to be from ground zero.. EDIT: Let me clarify.. I am just trying to get an idea what caused the steel on the left on the photo to look as it does... Doesnt appear to be cut with a torch... I'm not trying to play games or anything, just seen it so many times elsewhere I forgot I needed to be so specific... Gusset splice plate every third column at each floor connecting adjacent exterior columns, two rows of connecting bolts. Directly below this you see the similar gusset splice plate from the floor below before the bolts sheared the connecting plate. To the top right of the pic note the gussets at each floor, still attached. Note the four column to column base connecting bolts at 36 feet oc , hand access at each column inside at 6 feet above every third floor, floors bolts also sheared off. This is why the columns toppled outward, too slender, too great unbraced length after floors collapsed past the columns. Like balancing a stick at the end of another stick.
	Last edited by BasqueArch; 14th July 2009 at 06:40 AM.

14th July 2009, 07:05 AM	#27
Dumb All Over A Little Ugly on the Side Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: They call it the Earth (which is a dumb kinda name) Posts: 3,693	Originally Posted by BigBird I havent seen this one before.. Originally Posted by BigBird ... Its been linked a million times over at another forum... The twoofers always ask us to explain it... Something here is not quite passing the smell test.
	__________________ The Three Word Story Pledge of Allegiance-- "I Hereby swear upon Engelbert's grave that I will gallop, not stride run, not walk posting three words on Shemp's honor, honoring: bananas, dwarfs, clarinets, [the 7th naughty word], haggis, Batman, nuns, wombats until such time as I'm sober. Or dead." "Some people have a way with words, other people...Um...Oh...Uh, not have way." --Steve Martin Last edited by Dumb All Over; 14th July 2009 at 07:11 AM.

14th July 2009, 08:38 AM	#28
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Spanaway WA Posts: 18,613	It sort of looks to me as though someone had altered the colors to achieve an appearance that there was some sort of chemical or exotic energy involved in the damage. Yes, it is definitely from the perimeter wall. In this piece, all of the bolts are torn out, indicating that two panels of joined columns were moved away from each other. But notice that in Gravy's example, sometimes the bolt failed, sometimes the plate. Such randomness is not entirely consistant with demolition charges.

14th July 2009, 08:50 AM	#29
Brainster Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 10,455	Originally Posted by T.A.M. Interesting, never knew about these "spandrels" myself. Were they steel as well (they look it)? TAM Yes, they are the pieces that connect the columns. Much thinner than the columns themselves. If you look at the columns near the top right in the photo you can see the spandrels between them.
	__________________ My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

14th July 2009, 10:42 AM	#30
T.A.M. Keeper of the Kool-Vax Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: The Far East...of Canada Posts: 20,816	Yah I thought so. I got the impression that someone was subtly trying to allude to the fact that in the original OP, the picture gives a slight impression of metal that was melted (partially at least), and hence alluding to the "molten steel" argument. It has not DEvolved into that yet, so maybe I was wrong. TAM

14th July 2009, 11:31 AM	#31
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67	Originally Posted by Dumb All Over Something here is not quite passing the smell test. What I meant to say in the OP was I have not seen this one discussed here before. What are you getting at? How is this relevant?
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67

14th July 2009, 11:37 AM	#32
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67	Originally Posted by T.A.M. Yah I thought so. I got the impression that someone was subtly trying to allude to the fact that in the original OP, the picture gives a slight impression of metal that was melted (partially at least), and hence alluding to the "molten steel" argument. It has not DEvolved into that yet, so maybe I was wrong. TAM I don't buy the molten steel argument at all... 9 out of 10 things can easily be explained and understood by myself when talking to twoofers, but every now and then they ask me questions that I didn't consider and am not sure of... That's why I post here.. I am NOT a twoofer, I am just trying to get all the info I can, and I think this forum is the best place for it... I believe they are inferring when they post this picture that its evidence of thermite/molten steel/etc or very high temperatures not consistent with the fires... I know thats crap from all the other evidence, or lack thereof, I just want to know why.
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67

14th July 2009, 11:40 AM	#33
alienentity Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Somewhere between Here and There Posts: 4,240	Originally Posted by Newtons Bit The failure mode of the picture at the top is what is known as "block shear". It's what happens when the bolts don't fail, but the steel plate does. Looks like it was melted by thermite.
	__________________ Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!' 000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.' mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'

14th July 2009, 11:41 AM	#34
Dumb All Over A Little Ugly on the Side Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: They call it the Earth (which is a dumb kinda name) Posts: 3,693	Originally Posted by BigBird What I meant to say in the OP was I have not seen this one discussed here before. You did not say that, however. You did say, "I havent [sic] seen this one before.."
	__________________ The Three Word Story Pledge of Allegiance-- "I Hereby swear upon Engelbert's grave that I will gallop, not stride run, not walk posting three words on Shemp's honor, honoring: bananas, dwarfs, clarinets, [the 7th naughty word], haggis, Batman, nuns, wombats until such time as I'm sober. Or dead." "Some people have a way with words, other people...Um...Oh...Uh, not have way." --Steve Martin

14th July 2009, 12:22 PM	#35
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67	Originally Posted by Dumb All Over You did not say that, however. You did say, "I havent [sic] seen this one before.." Fantastic. My mistake.. What the hell is your point?
BigBird Scholar Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 67

14th July 2009, 12:42 PM	#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 BigBird I don't buy the molten steel argument at all... 9 out of 10 things can easily be explained and understood by myself when talking to twoofers, but every now and then they ask me questions that I didn't consider and am not sure of... That's why I post here.. I am NOT a twoofer, I am just trying to get all the info I can, and I think this forum is the best place for it... I believe they are inferring when they post this picture that its evidence of thermite/molten steel/etc or very high temperatures not consistent with the fires... I know thats crap from all the other evidence, or lack thereof, I just want to know why. Sorry Bigbird. I should have been more clear. I wasn't insinuating that you believed the argument, but rather that this is the argument and line of thinking that was being alluded to. In future, to avoid ambiguity and potential suspicions, better to come outright and say what arguments you feel the truthers will use with the picture, and then ask what others think of the picture in relation to that argument. As you know, they have seen more then there share of vague posts here, that turn out to be nothing more than a truther in disguise, trying to lead them down a garden path. TAM