2521 replies to this topic

[skyeagle409]

SpeakTheTruth, on 04 February 2013 - 06:09 AM, said:

That is a big thing for me too. How the media changed from day one to day 2.  After that, I don't believe any "eyewitnesses" on either side. I do however believe those people that heard bombs go off and hell, we can hear them go off.

You can't change what we hear live and they can't rig that. But we can hear what they say live and when they start ignoring what they said on day 1 while it was live. They ignore those bombs and tower 7. A coincidence?

Let's do comparisons between real demolition implosions and the collapse of WTC7.

!

And now, what you heard in the video above is not what you hear when WTC7 collapsed in the following video.

[skyeagle409]

Steel without thermal protection can fail extremely quickly in a fire:


"One of the most common structures today is the strip mall built with steel bar joists and metal deck roofs. A serious fire in one of these structures should be expected to produce roof collapse in as little as 5 to 10 minutes." Firehouse.com Sept. 1998

https://sites.google...teelcolumnstobu

EFFECT OF SUPPORT CONDITIONS ON STEEL
BEAMS EXPOSED OF FIRE

Department of Civil Engineering

University of Canterbury
Christchurch, New Zealand

1. Introduction
1.1 General

Structural steel has been widely used throughout the world. It is one of a designer’s best
options in view of its advantages over other materials. Steel is available in a range of discrete
size, and its ductile behaviour allows plastic deformation upon yielding, therefore avoiding
brittle failures.

In reinforced concrete structures, steel enhances the concrete strength by
carrying the tensile forces. It is also commonly used to reinforce timber constructions.
In spite of its advantages, steel on its own is vulnerable in fire.

Elevated temperatures in the steel cause reduction in its strength and stiffness which eventually leads to failure due to
excessive deformations. This is crucial in steel in compared with concrete or timber members
as steel conducts heat very well and often comes in thin or slender elements.

2.4.2 Steel design at elevated temperature

There are a few modifications to be considered when designing structures for fire conditions
although the concepts are similar to those for the ambient condition. Most of the material
properties change with temperature, the strength is reduced upon heating and thermal
expansion may induce internal forces that lead to structural failure with various mechanisms
depending on the type of supports, connections and structural arrangements.

Instability failure also needs to be considered even though the structure still has adequate
strength. The applied loads for fire design are less due to very low probability of the event
occurring when the structure is fully loaded at its maximum capacity, therefore a smaller
safety factor is acceptable.

The actual load at a given time as a proportion of the load that would cause collapse of the
structure is often referred to as the load ratio. Most constructions have a load ratio of 0.5 or
less. Smaller load ratio means greater fire resistance as the reduction of strength of any
member will not necessarily cause collapse of the structure.

Failure mechanisms

The failure of a beam is reached when its strength is exceeded at one or more particular points
termed plastic hinges, depending on they way it is supported. Figure 2.13 is the illustration by
Buchanan (2000), showing the bending moment, deflected shape and the failure mechanism
for different end conditions.

The development of plastic hinges shows ductile behaviour as energy is dissipated

http://www.civil.can...ts/JSepturo.pdf

In WTC Building 5, this large column and beam buckled on floor 8 of 9.

The fire was fueled by office materials only.

Edited by skyeagle409, 04 February 2013 - 06:52 AM.

[skyeagle409]

SpeakTheTruth, on 04 February 2013 - 06:09 AM, said:

That is a big thing for me too. How the media changed from day one to day 2.  After that, I don't believe any "eyewitnesses" on either side. I do however believe those people that heard bombs go off and hell, we can hear them go off.

If there was a bomb explosion, they would have known. Here is one example why.



Let's try another.

Edited by skyeagle409, 04 February 2013 - 07:15 AM.

[RaptorBites]

SpeakTheTruth, on 04 February 2013 - 04:56 AM, said:

There is no video that shows a plane. There are couple that show something hitting it. Hard to believe you wouldn't be able to tell it was a plane. The planes that hit the WTC were pretty easy to spot. Not sure why this would be any different, especially since there are way more camera around the Pentagon. But all we get is a whole flash. Not consistent with a plane at all.

Where is your evidence that there are "way more cameras" around the Pentagon that captured the actual impact?  Most of you truthers always say this yet cannot come up with any consistent information listing camera locations and the direction they are pointing in order to corroborate your "many cameras that saw impact" theory.

SpeakTheTruth, on 04 February 2013 - 04:56 AM, said:

See, you can say all you want about how you know there were airplane parts there but none were ever found. Not ones from a 757 at least. I'm sure if there were they would've have brought them up as evidence.

None were ever found?  Says who?  There were many photos taken of a large commercial airliner found in and around the Pentagon impact zone.

Here is a page that shows many of interviews of witness reports and photos of plane debris.

http://therightblogg....blogspot.co.nz

SpeakTheTruth, on 04 February 2013 - 04:56 AM, said:

yep, the FDR cut off 6 seconds from impact. That is really weird. You can't explain that away.

Actually, it was 4 seconds.

The final 4 seconds were "damaged" by the impact.  The decompressor program given to the NTSB was not able to decode the final 4 seconds of the CSV file due to some columns of data missing, possible due to damage from the impact.

http://journalof911s...ltimeter_92.pdf

The person who was able to decode the final 4 seconds is Warren Stutt.  Here is a website where you can get more information regarding his updates to the decompressor and the FDR raw data given to him under a FOIA request.

http://www.warrenstutt.com/

SpeakTheTruth, on 04 February 2013 - 04:56 AM, said:

And the fact they couldn't find one black box at the WTC but found a passport and id in perfect condition? the panes wnet poof but a passport was the main evidence to blame the hijackers (but never convict them.)

Is it your opinion that black boxes are still recoverable after having tons of steel and concrete landing on them?  Hmmmmm...??

SpeakTheTruth, on 04 February 2013 - 04:56 AM, said:

Can you explain why 163 out of 500 people questioned said they heard explosions, but none were ever tested for?

There is no evidence of "explosives".  163 out of 500 is a minority and the sounds of explosions can be attributed to other things.  Falling bodies on the roof tops of other buildings, crashing elevators, etc.  

There was even a news crew across the street of WTC 1 when it started its collapse and not one explosion was heard.

SpeakTheTruth, on 04 February 2013 - 04:56 AM, said:

Not only that, they shipped the rubble out as fast as possible and wouldn't let anybody near it.

Actually Bao Steel, the company in China the steel was shipped to for recycling didn't receive the first shipment till the latter half of January.  Doesn't seem like the shipping was "as fast as possible" as some people would like you to think.

[RaptorBites]

SpeakTheTruth, on 04 February 2013 - 06:09 AM, said:

That is a big thing for me too. How the media changed from day one to day 2.  After that, I don't believe any "eyewitnesses" on either side. I do however believe those people that heard bombs go off and hell, we can hear them go off.

Basically confirmation bias.  So you will believe eyewitnesses that support your pre-conceived conclusions, yet will not believe those who stated no explosions were heard?

SpeakTheTruth, on 04 February 2013 - 06:09 AM, said:

You can't change what we hear live and they can't rig that. But we can hear what they say live and when they start ignoring what they said on day 1 while it was live. They ignore those bombs and tower 7. A coincidence?

News media got so many things wrong on that day, and really it was to be expected anyways.  How many times have initial news broadcasts been correct in the past especially during high stress times?  Were you expecting everything to be 100% accurate based on the many witness reports being handed off to reports?

Can you provide me video evidence that include audio of controlled demolition during the collapse of WTC 1,2 and 7?  

People like you tend to forget that 1 large boom is not evidence of controlled demolition, controlled demolition videos generally have audio reference of several sequential explosions prior to the structure collapsing.

[RaptorBites]

SpeakTheTruth, on 04 February 2013 - 06:28 AM, said:

Ever notice how they always stop as soon as the wings are about to hit the wall? They can't explain what happened to the wings when it hit the building and a perfect hole came out the other end.

http://www.youtube.c...v=YVDdjLQkUV8#!

Boeing 757 are made from Aluminium Alloy 2024 because of its strength to weight ratio, however, it is still aluminium.

A Boeing 757 near fully fueled travelling 500+ mph on impact with a reinforce concrete building with blast proof windows, and you expect for the wings to sheer off while expecting to see a tail and intact fuselage?

Did science and physics even come to mind when coming to that horrible conclusion?

The great thing here about science is, regardless if you understand it or not, science is 99.9% correct.

[DONTEATUS]

It was just like that ! 757 went into the building THats what happens !

[SpeakTheTruth]

RaptorBites, on 04 February 2013 - 09:05 AM, said:

Where is your evidence that there are "way more cameras" around the Pentagon that captured the actual impact?  Most of you truthers always say this yet cannot come up with any consistent information listing camera locations and the direction they are pointing in order to corroborate your "many cameras that saw impact" theory.



None were ever found?  Says who?  There were many photos taken of a large commercial airliner found in and around the Pentagon impact zone.

Here is a page that shows many of interviews of witness reports and photos of plane debris.

http://therightblogg....blogspot.co.nz



Actually, it was 4 seconds.

The final 4 seconds were "damaged" by the impact.  The decompressor program given to the NTSB was not able to decode the final 4 seconds of the CSV file due to some columns of data missing, possible due to damage from the impact.

http://journalof911s...ltimeter_92.pdf

The person who was able to decode the final 4 seconds is Warren Stutt.  Here is a website where you can get more information regarding his updates to the decompressor and the FDR raw data given to him under a FOIA request.

http://www.warrenstutt.com/



Is it your opinion that black boxes are still recoverable after having tons of steel and concrete landing on them?  Hmmmmm...??



There is no evidence of "explosives".  163 out of 500 is a minority and the sounds of explosions can be attributed to other things.  Falling bodies on the roof tops of other buildings, crashing elevators, etc.  

There was even a news crew across the street of WTC 1 when it started its collapse and not one explosion was heard.



Actually Bao Steel, the company in China the steel was shipped to for recycling didn't receive the first shipment till the latter half of January.  Doesn't seem like the shipping was "as fast as possible" as some people would like you to think.

Not what I meant about eyewitnesses. I mean that after that day, I have a hard time believing either side than I can when it was happening.

And dude they bragged about how fast they got the ruble off that site. None of it was ever tested for explosives. The is the government's fault that there are thin many question, not mine.

Within 2 months we were at war and had the Patriot Act written and signed, but no investigation started for 14 months. That's not the actions of men who give a crap

That's the government's fault,. You can blame them for the questions existing. And for not answering the questions.

And 163 is enough of a reason to at least investigate the explosions, and didn't need to be ignored by corporate media soon after. Like day 2.

Do you guys find it the least bit odd they didn't investigate this and do you find it odd the 9/11 commission report and the media completely ignored tower 7 falling out of the sky like no building in history?

I mean you really can't be okay with all of that can you?

Edited by SpeakTheTruth, 06 February 2013 - 10:58 PM.

[SpeakTheTruth]

RaptorBites, on 04 February 2013 - 09:12 AM, said:

Basically confirmation bias.  So you will believe eyewitnesses that support your pre-conceived conclusions, yet will not believe those who stated no explosions were heard?



News media got so many things wrong on that day, and really it was to be expected anyways.  How many times have initial news broadcasts been correct in the past especially during high stress times?  Were you expecting everything to be 100% accurate based on the many witness reports being handed off to reports?

Can you provide me video evidence that include audio of controlled demolition during the collapse of WTC 1,2 and 7?  

People like you tend to forget that 1 large boom is not evidence of controlled demolition, controlled demolition videos generally have audio reference of several sequential explosions prior to the structure collapsing.

I never said there was one large boom. people like tend to forget buildings don't just fall out of the sky. You don't have to know what happened to wonder why the government covered this all up.
And of course people know there are cam,eras everywhere at the Pentagon. You know it and I know it and so does everybody. And don't pretend there is not.



let's not pretend this isn't a secured, heavily monitored building, we all know it is. If I ran the country and somebody was accusing me of killing 3,00 people, I would show a video of the plane hitting the building. And so would they.

I know, weird about the wings of the plane and how  they always show the plane through the building and completely ignore what happened when the wings hit.

Did I ever say their was a controlled explosion in tower 7? I just want to know why the government and media  ignored it forever. I don't know what happened, I just want a real investigation and so should you. You can bet your ass they would investigate everything they though you did. yet you just let them off the hook.

Edited by SpeakTheTruth, 06 February 2013 - 11:08 PM.

[SpeakTheTruth]

skyeagle409, on 04 February 2013 - 07:03 AM, said:

If there was a bomb explosion, they would have known. Here is one example why.



Let's try another.

And if a plane flew over my head I would have heard it. And I i had a lot of cameras something would've recorded it.

Just ignore all of that. It's much easier that way,

[SpeakTheTruth]

skyeagle409, on 04 February 2013 - 06:43 AM, said:

Let's do comparisons between real demolition implosions and the collapse of WTC7.

!

And now, what you heard in the video above is not what you hear when WTC7 collapsed in the following video.

Agreed, except what they are accused of using and what they use in demos are not the same thing.

Like I sad though, I'm not sure I ever said the building was demoed, I just want to know why it went ignored. A building of that magnitude falling out of the  sky like never before and no investigation until the familiy's demanded it, and that was anything but an "independent investigation". You can't think that's right. Most of the victim's families don't think it's right I know that.

You can think their silence is okay and I will believe it's not.

It's not okay that they never convicted anybody involved with it but punished American citizens with the Patriot Act?

Do you think that's okay? Doesn't raise any level of concern for you? It doesn't concern you that over half the 9/11 commission thinks it should be re-investigated? It doesn't bother you that a whole bunch of the victim's families think they have been ignored and given the runaround?

Would it bother you if your kid had been the one who died and they were ignoring you? It bothers me.

[DONTEATUS]

Give it a break ! A Jet Did Hit the Towers & Pentagon ! Nuff Said !

[Babe Ruth]

Exactly right Speak The Truth--if the official story were true, that a 757 struck the Pentagon, the pictures of it would have been blazed all over the mainstream media.

Just as they had all those pictures of Atta and others at ATM, going through the airport, at motels and car rental agencies, and god knows where else, they would have had pictures of a Boeing striking the Pentagon, a very heavily monitored federal building bristling with cameras, as you have shown here.

It was a hoax, a false flag, and that's why there are no pictures.

[skyeagle409]

SpeakTheTruth, on 06 February 2013 - 11:00 PM, said:

I know, weird about the wings of the plane and how  they always show the plane through the building and completely ignore what happened when the wings hit.

What happened to the wings of American 77, happened to the wings of the B-25, which struck the Empire State building.




A couple of wing flaps basically survived somewhat, intact.




And, ribs and honeycomb core that is used in certain wing panels, found inside the Pentagon.

Edited by skyeagle409, 07 February 2013 - 07:07 PM.

[skyeagle409]

SpeakTheTruth, on 06 February 2013 - 11:19 PM, said:

Agreed, except what they are accused of using and what they use in demos are not the same thing.

It takes carefully placed explosives to bring down buildings the size of the WTC buildings. There were no explosions. The fact the WTC buildings began to buckle indicates that fire, not explosives, is weakening the structures.

Quote

Like I sad though, I'm not sure I ever said the building was demoed, I just want to know why it went ignored.

]

There was no evidence of explosives, In other words, if explosives were used, there would be a need to investigate, but there was nothing there to investigate as far as explosives were concerned, and remember, investigations cost a lot of money and looking for something for which there was no evidence for in the first place waste money and time and deflects from a real investigaton. During the clean-up, no evidence of explosives of any kind was found, either in the rubble nor at the Fresh Kills landfill.  

Quote

You can think their silence is okay and I will believe it's not. It's not okay that they never convicted anybody involved with it but punished American citizens with the Patriot Act?

Three weeks before the 911 attacks, I left the Philippines for San Francisco, and while waited for my flight, I remarked as to why security at US airports was not as strict at those in the Philippines.

Quote

Would it bother you if your kid had been the one who died and they were ignoring you? It bothers me.

Yes! But remember, the terrorist had planned and carried out the 911 attack.