20
21

How did firefighters determine beforehand that WTC 7 was going to collapse (when collapses from fire alone are supposedly impossible)? (self.911truth)

HangOn2UrEgo が 投稿

The firefighters had already determined that WTC 7 was probably going to collapse before it did, and that information was prevalent enough to cause the BBC to infamously report the collapse of WTC 7 before it actually happened. All these conspiracy theories insist how impossible and unexpected it was for a steel skyscraper like WTC 7 to collapse from office fires alone, and some are even ludicrous enough to suggest that the "inside job" extends to the individual firefighters and the BBC.

What did the firefighters see (or hear) in the burning building that made them so certain that it was going to collapse?

Also, how did the firefighters know to stand exactly five blocks away from the imminent collapse's harmful debris cloud (exactly where the cloud ended up stopping) if a collapse "into it's own footprint" was so unusual?

全 24 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]hamtaylor 7ポイント8ポイント  (9子コメント)

Judging from statements by Barry Jennings, 7 was rocked by explosions throughout the day. Most likely pre-set explosions weakening the structure. When firefighters went in, they knew the building was doomed so they set a perimeter and waited for the collapse. For all they knew, terrorists had wired the building to come down. I bet they were as shocked as the rest of us when they heard the official narrative.

[–]IgnoreTheTwoof -1ポイント0ポイント  (8子コメント)

Any evidence of these explosives going off? Any residue?

[–]hamtaylor 3ポイント4ポイント  (7子コメント)

Just witness testimony. The steel was shipped to China.

[–]IgnoreTheTwoof -1ポイント0ポイント  (6子コメント)

The steel was shipped to China.

So no one was able to look at the steel before it was shipped to China?

And how much experience with explosives did Barry Jennings have? Was he a demolitions expert?

[–]Akareyon 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

Why did NIST and official demolitions experts not look at the steel before it was shipped to China, in blatant violation of NFPA 921?

[–]IgnoreTheTwoof -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

Why did NIST and official demolitions experts not look at the steel before it was shipped to China, in blatant violation of NFPA 921?

But they did. There was a demolitions supervision company that was brought in to document the deconstruction and debris removal process:

"Our teams took thousands of photographs and personally examined untold amounts of debris, including countless structural elements from WTC 1 & 2. While these photographs and video recordings were not originally intended to specifically prove or disprove evidence of explosive demolition, they do provide substantial visual evidence that relates directly to this analysis and places us in a position to speak first-hand of conditions on site rather than relying on outside testimony or hearsay."

And their official, expert analysis: not a controlled demolition.

http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC%20STUDY%208-06%20w%20clarif%20as%20of%209-8-06%20.pdf

So on one hand you have one of the world's most knowledgeable independent authorities on explosive demolition, having performed engineering studies, structure analysis, vibration/air overpressure monitoring and photographic services on well over 1,000 structure blasting events in more than 30 countries saying that it was not a controlled demolition...

Versus a retired professor of philosophy of religion and theology turned political writer who, after reading the word "explosion" in reports concludes that it all was done with bombs.

[–]Akareyon -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

I do not know that retired professor of philosophy of religion and theology you speak of.

We were talking about WTC7, but I prefer WTC 1 & 2 as well.

So you want to prove a tall, slender, free-standing structure just falls out of and through itself without explosives? Take the /r/911truth challenge!

"If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. In that simple statement is the key to science. It doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are who made the guess, or what his name is… If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it.”

Go and try to build something that mirrors the Twins before and during the so-called "collapse".

  • It should have at least 20 (twenty) floors.

  • It should somewhat fulfill the definition of a tower (in terms of slenderness ratio λ).

  • It should be somewhat stable.

  • It must stand up on its own.

  • It may have any scale.

  • It may be of any material.

  • It may have any density.

  • It may have any structural layout.

  • You may initiate the "collapse" by picking up the top third of the tower and let it drop on the base. You may drop it from whichever height you like.

    • BONUS POINT CHALLENGE: initiate a delayed, sudden total progressive collapse by setting it alight with any amount of Zippo gas, kerosene or Diesel. It must not move (non-negligibly) for at least ten minutes.

  • The "collapse" must be complete, vertical and roughly radially symmetric (no falling over) and happen within 300% free fall time.

  • You may not energetically replace the alleged demolition devices with rubber bands, Slinkies, Prince Rupert's drops, domino contraptions or popsicle stick bombs.

  • It must work 100%.

  • You are allowed to ask help from engineers, architects and experts. Please don't bother Bazant, his interest was only temporary, his study small and unfunded, I still feel bad about stealing his precious time by asking him for an experiment or model, Zhou and Verdure wouldn't respond, but Dr. Greening and the folks in the engineering subs will surely be happy to help you out with some theoretical background.

  • You must not post an excuse for not even trying to.

[–]hamtaylor 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

Ah, you're one of "them". I personally have no interest in NHL - you won't see me on that sub. I have no interest in debunking the flat earth society - you won't see me on that sub. You, however, seem to have an interest in "debunking" those in a 9/11 sub which means you are one of two things: a troll, or a shill with an agenda. I don't bother with either. Enjoy that steak.

[–]IgnoreTheTwoof 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

You, however, seem to have an interest in "debunking" those in a 9/11 sub which means you are one of two things: a troll, or a shill with an agenda.

Or, perhaps neither of those and is someone that thinks that the information presented may not be the most accurate. If you want to present a theory, back it up with facts. Its pretty simple.

And I see you're one of THEM - someone that when presented with an opinion that differs from their own immediately shuts down the conversation because they cant adequately argue their position.

Got it. Thanks.

[–]hamtaylor 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Arguing with people like you is a dead end street. There are many, many books and documentaries out there with plenty of facts to challenge your opinion/world view.

Your handle is IgnoreTheTwoof. You've clearly already made your mind up.

[–]stmfreak 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

There were a lot of firsts that day.

[–]setthetrap 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'm curious too. There are videos of first responders talking about wtc 7 being brought down or coming down well beforehand

[–]Lookingfortruths 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

There were firefighters on video walking away from WTC 7 saying that the building is about to blow up

[–]Akareyon 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

when collapses from fire alone are supposedly impossible

What a silly strawman argument. Vertical, symmetrical collapses at almost free fall time straight down into the own footprint is impossible for a steel framed building without an expertly engineered demolition. Nobody in his sane mind would exclude a partial/asymmetrical collapse due to localized damage andor fire.

Also, how did the firefighters know to stand exactly five blocks away from the imminent collapse's harmful debris cloud (exactly where the cloud ended up stopping) if a collapse "into it's own footprint" was so unusual?

The so-called "collapse" of the Twins and the chirping of the PASS devices right after the WTC2 demolition may have left some impression, don't you think?

[–]SovereignMan 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

the chirping of the PASS devices

I've never heard of this before. To what does it refer?

[–]SovereignMan 2ポイント3ポイント  (4子コメント)

From my understanding, the claim that WTC7 was going to collapse came from one person that was allegedly an architect or structural engineer that happened to be on site who told someone of importance (Giuliani?) that it would collapse. That was then relayed to FDNY.

Perhaps someone else here has a link to a source for that. I don't have one bookmarked.

[–]TaurusII 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

According to an entry in the Complete 9/11 Timeline, someone from Mayor Giuliani's Office of Emergency Management put out the message that the Twin Towers would collapse before they came down. See:
http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a959emtworker&scale=0
(Before 9:59 a.m.) September 11, 2001: EMT Worker Given Message That WTC Towers Are Going to Collapse; High-Level Officials Evacuate Lobby of North Tower

So perhaps the message that WTC 7 was going to collapse also originated with someone from the Office of Emergency Management.

[–]IgnoreTheTwoof -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

"There was enough there and we were marking off. There were a lot of damaged apparatus there that were covered. We tried to get searches in those areas. By now, this is going on into the afternoon, and we were concerned about additional collapse, not only of the Marriott, because there was a good portion of the Marriott still standing, but also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse. "

-FDNY Chief Peter Hayden

[–]kwistenbiebel -4ポイント-3ポイント  (1子コメント)

The South West corner of building 7 got seriously damaged at the bottom (floor 18 and down) by the two main towers collapsing. It was not picked up on video as much (not at all?) because the South side was disaster zone (dust cloud) and most footage was shot from a distance picking up only the higher parts of the building. View from a helicopter on the South side of building 7. http://i.imgur.com/U5Bs4tO.jpg It must have been clear that the building was unsalvageable on visual cue by fire department and other first responders. The rumor that the building being unsalvageable and prone to collapse reached news broadcasters and was at some point interpreted as building 7 was already down. Human error in hectic news reporting.

[–]Akareyon 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

The South West corner of building 7 got seriously damaged at the bottom (floor 18 and down) by the two main towers collapsing.

According to the official conspiracy theory, the damage from the WTC1 "collapse" debris played no significant role and was mainly of cosmetic nature.