The planes hit to high up the towers to cause a collapse
The towers survived both impacts, and would have survived indefinitely if not for the fires. WTC2 was hit lower than WTC1 and collapsed first, but these two facts are barely related, if at all. WTC2 fell first because the plane that hit it hit with about 50% more kinetic energy, destroyed more columns, and more core column, including a very important corner column, thus leading to a more sever redistribution of axial loads post impact, and its fuel was dispersed in a more concentrated area, leading to the the fire induced sagging of floors, and inward bowing of perimeter columns observed in the photo histories sooner.
Furthermore, a members likeliness to fail does not depend on its load, but its demand to capacity ratio, and so similar members will have similar DC ratios, since a good engineer is an efficient one.
The planes broke windows to feed the fire, caused structural damage, and knocked off fireproofing. Those are the main factors that come into play when analyzing the collapses, not the height of impact.
i remembered learning that cold burning fires produce thick black smoke as the fire is starved of fuel, and going out
What about oil wells burning freely in open air? Are they going out, or starved of fuel or oxygen?
Of course not, smoke coloration actually depends on the material being burned, and the offices contained plastics as well as carpets and furniture that will produce the observed smoke coloration.
Also, lets assume that you could somehow predict temperature by smoke coloration, there is no way to determine how hot the hottest parts of the fire are, nor can you determine the temperatures in the 'far field,' areas which are not exposed to flame, and may have even burned out, but are still exposed to hot gas and can reach very hot temps for very long times(see link)
http://www.era.lib.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/1842/1980/1/Rein_Interflam07.pdf 1, it is a fact, only 3 buildings have ever collapsed 'due to fires' the WTC,1,2,7. and given that building built long before have survived worse fires. this seems...suspicious?
No, thats very very wrong, here is a list of some collapses due to fire, it does not include the Madrid Windsor building, in which the steel framed perimeter collapsed but the concrete core survived, the three kader toy factories which all collapsed in less than an hour, and the Charleston super sofa store:
http://www.haifire.com/presentations/Historical_Collapse_Survey.pdfAlso the WTC case is not a normal fire, ignoring structural damage from impact, the gash and the broken windows from the impact, thus providing extra ventilation and hotter fires, as well as the lost fireproofing make it an extraordinary circumstance. The same applies to WTC 7, although given the time it burned, fireproofing no longer matters.
The construction of the buildings also needs to be taken into account, the truss system in the towers is popular in the US but not in Europe, largely for fire protection issues, and in fact it was the trusses sagging and pulling in on the outer columns that lead to collapse.
For 7, the construction of the building was such that the failure of one column may have lead to the collapse of the whole building:
http://www.structuremag.org/Archives/2007-11/SF-WTC7-Gilsanz-Nov07.pdf 2, wtc7 contained thousands of files related to investigations into illegal trading. convenient they dont exist now.
Its very inconvenient that they had to blow the building up instead of using professional services to destroy sensitive documents like a normal company would. Its also ihconvenient that SEC hard drives were recovered.
where was the wreckage from flight 93 and the pentagon?
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/911pentagonflight77evidencesummaryhttp://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/flight93shanksvillesummaryofevidence%2 Cman
but the seemingly only items to survive this massive crash, happens to be the evidence to incriminate a couple the 'terrorists'
all the evidence of the crash was posted, here are other items that survived crashes:
http://americanhistory.si.edu/september11/collection/record.asp?ID=214, I have a couple of friends who were working in a studio in WTC. They are both very intelligent people, not irrational or easily influenced and i trust what they say. They testify that there was a massive explosion in the basement, they were only a couple floors up and immediately made there way back down only to discover the lobby blown apart. As they made there way out the building the first plane hit. If the lazy *beep* went to work on time they would be dead now. If the WTC fell due to fires from the planes, how can bombs detonating before the planes hit be explaned?
If there time line is off by a mere fifteen minutes, they could have confused the second plane with the first.
When the planes struck, some of the jet fuel spilled down the elevator shafts and ignited flash fires on the mechanical floors and all the way down to the lobby. You can search for videos of 'backdraft' if you want to see the concept at work here, and what kind of power this phenomena has.
This testimony is corroborated by numerous witnesses, by the damage to the lobby, and the injuries to victims, who received burns, rather than the blunt trauma, or complete obliteration associated with being hit with the shock wave from an explosive.
18 Saudi's and 1 Afgan who were named
it was mostly saudis but the rest were a bunch of different nationalities. Saudi Arabia wasn't invaded because there is a difference between the saudi gov't and independent saudi citizens, and the saudi gov't was not considered to be involved in the plot, nor was it considered to be a regime that harbored terrorists.
reply
share