I thought this thread had stopped. Maybe my life depended on it. Just joking. And how.
You may die old, before the official story is debunked on this site. lol Oh, oh this is off topic.
It wasn't a loaded question, merely a question that you refused to answer because it exposed your irrational position on the NFPA 921 directive. However, since you are so sure it was a loaded question, you'll be able to quickly and easily expose how answering either yes or no was a false choice.
Otherwise you'll just look silly, won't you?
See post 204. If you can address that, show how this difference is relevant in this case, where these more applicable building collapse guidelines exist, and why these guidelines should not represent the application of the scientific method in the same way as
the NFPA 921 guidelines I have quoted up thread.
I forgot to add: Much of the new electrical, air-conditioning and mechanical equipment will serve three double-height trading floors. To create the extra height, workers are removing most of three existing floors, using jackhammers to demolish concrete slabs and torches to remove steel decking and girders beneath the concrete.
It didn't collapse when they removed the girders from 3 floors.
Otherwise you'll apologise for saying I'm blind, won't you?
Yes. Again, nothing in it about NIST's failure to test for explosive residue or analyse the steel.
Then you're saying that NIST failed to test for explosive residue. That says it all. NIST failed at using an actual model and instead used a computer generated model. NIST failed to report on actual temperatures at WTC 7. USGS did. Therefore NIST's data is wrong.
jomper, You created a fantasy about what I said.
Thank you for pointing out that thread. A couple of points from it
External Quote:
16. For its study of WTC 7, why didn't NIST follow the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) guidelines for conducting a fire investigation?
NFPA 921, "Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations," is a recommended methodology for optimizing investigations. NFPA 921 acknowledges that each investigation is unique, and that some investigations will require broader procedures than it can accommodate. This was especially true for NIST's WTC investigation, which responded to events that were much more than typical fires or explosions.
However, NIST's WTC 7 investigation did follow the core tenet of NFPA 921, which is the application of the scientific method. The investigation was carefully planned, sources of information were identified and contacted, the building fire and collapse event and the investigation were documented, available evidence was obtained (including documents about the design and construction of the structure), and the origin of the fire was determined based on images, laboratory testing (conducted for the towers, but applicable to WTC 7), and mathematical analyses.
Additionally, in its study of WTC 7, NIST considered all available data and evaluated a range of possible collapse mechanisms: uncontrolled fires on the tenant floors, fuel oil fires, hypothetical blast events, and fires within the Con Ed substation. NIST developed a working hypothesis, modeled the fires and the building, and then used the models to test the hypothesis against the observed behavior of the building. This approach is fully consistent with the principles of scientific inquiry.
This is from another poster there.
External Quote:
The largest building brought down in that manner was the J. L. Hudson building and annex. The following is a ummary of the seven months of preparation it took, and I believe the building was empty at the time. Can you imagine how, only three years later, not one but three taller buildings could have been imploded and the setup done while they were occupied?
"Mark Loizeaux, President of CDI, called Hudson's the greatest dynamic structural control challenge the company had ever faced. CDI had to sever the steel in the columns and create a delay system which could simultaneously control the failure of the building's 12 different structural configurations, while trying to keep the hundreds of thousands of tons of debris within the 420 ft by 220 ft footprint of the structure. CDI needed structural data to complete its design. Under CDI direction, Homrich/NASDI's 21 man crew needed three months to investigate the complex and four months to complete preparations for CDI's implosion design. During that period, the lower two basements of the structure were filled with engineered fill and the perimeter basement walls bermed to 1st basement level with soil to support perimeter walls which would surely have failed under soil and hydrostatic loads once the horizontal support of the Hudson's internal structure was removed by the implosion.
Double column rows installed in the structure between vertical construction phases, internal brick shear walls, x-bracing, 70 elevators and 10 stairwells created an extremely stiff frame. Columns weighing over 500 lb/ft, having up to 7.25 inch thick laminated steel flanges and 6 inch thick webs, defied commercially available shaped charge technology. CDI analyzed each column, determined the actual load it carried and then used cutting torches to scarf-off steel plates in order to use smaller shaped charges to cut the remaining steel. CDI wanted to keep the charges as small as possible to reduce air over pressure that could break windows in adjacent properties.
CDI's 12 person loading crew took twenty four days to place 4,118 separate charges in 1,100 locations on columns on nine levels of the complex. Over 36,000 ft of detonating cord and 4,512 non-electric delay elements were installed in CDI's implosion initiation system, some to create the 36 primary implosion sequence and another 216 micro-delays to keep down the detonation overpressure from the 2,728 lb of explosives which would be detonated during the demolition."
Please note this part
External Quote:
Additionally, in its study of WTC 7, NIST considered all available data and evaluated a range of possible collapse mechanisms: uncontrolled fires on the tenant floors, fuel oil fires, hypothetical blast events, and fires within the Con Ed substation. NIST developed a working hypothesis, modeled the fires and the building, and then used the models to test the hypothesis against the observed behavior of the building. This approach is fully consistent with the principles of scientific inquiry
Considered and dismissed, because the
FACTS showed that the fires, the damage and the construction of the building was the cause. No explosives needed
They were not investigating a fire, but a building collapse. With the info from the other thread, I now consider this part of the discussion closed.
Probably.
Just to straighten out your kinks a little:
I detest the States and almost everything it stands for*. YET I'm aware that the greatest number of the most able individuals live there, possibly barring China. And it's a beautiful country.
I could never stand the CIA, G H W Bush and his blowout son, or the rest of the cronies, Reagan, Nixon, the peanut guy. Or the dancing star of the FBI, or any of the Kennedys. (I'm still amazed that they didn't hit the nuclear button in the early sixties). There hasn't been a US politician I have respected since Roosevelt Eisenhower. Considering what they could be doing, Americans, as a body of people, are just - dross. All the cleverest people, and still no proper social, health, and education services, WTF?
If you happen to be British, let me tell you something: monarchy IS fascism. So go f--- yourself some more. Be as stupid as you like.
The only reason to debunk bunk is because it's bunk**. While it hangs around it distracts from what people really need to know. I honestly believe that the 911 truth movement is backed by the remnants of the Bush junta. It has worked very well to protect the incumbents from proper prosecution. It's not as though they weren't criminally incompetent.
It's a massive shame on all of us. We are all responsible.
* except of course its insistence on individual liberty, which is its saving grace. Religious fundamentalism, and the countries that apply this, is/are so much worse.
** And you Grieves and you Muttkat, promote it. That's you down there, then. Minions of the people you despise. "Useful ------".
OK, the US really sucks now, I detest it too. I can agree with your dross statement and most of that paragraph except Kennedy tried to do the right thing as with Exec Order 11110 but got assassinated.
As far as the truth movement back by the Bush junta....Come on, could we get a little more absurd? Being me and Grieves are minions of the people we despise????? Myself, I don't believe the official story because all the lies I've uncovered. Being you believe the NIST story...which is from the remnants of the Bush junta if anybody was to be a "useful " it would be you.
As far as "you down there" are you speaking down to me from your pedestal from the heavens above?
OK, back to 7.
COMMERCIAL PROPERTY: The Salomon Solution; A Building Within a Building, at a Cost of $200 Million
By MARK McCAIN
Published: February 19, 1989
BEFORE it moves into a new office tower in downtown Manhattan, Salomon Brothers, the brokerage firm, intends to spend nearly two years and more than $200 million cutting out floors, adding elevators, reinforcing steel girders, upgrading power supplies and making other improvements in its million square feet of space.
The work, which began last month at Seven World Trade Center, reflects both the adaptability of steel-framed towers and the extraordinary importance of fail-safe...... According to many real estate experts, no company has ever made such extensive alterations to a new office building in Manhattan.
The issue of molten metal, which was discovered under both the twin towers and WTC 7, suggesting an extremely hot burning agent was used in the demolition process, is completely ignored in NIST's report, despite it being acknowledged in Appendix C of FEMA's World Trade Center Building Performance Study, which stated:
Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel… The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified.
Speaking during a press conference that was called to counter NIST, Richard Gage, founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and a member of the American Institute of Architects, dismissed the report.
"Tons of [molten metal] was found 21 days after the attack," said Gage in an interview with a Vancouver, Canada television station. "Steel doesn't begin to melt until 2,700 degrees, (Faranheit) which is much hotter than what these fires could have caused."
Being you believe NIST's fairytale, do you think NIST based its evidence after the building was retrofitted? Of course not.
FEMA states there was a severe high temperature. What are NIST's temperatures? 572 degrees F?
Why do fires collapse hi rise building but don't collapse Kerosene heaters?
All-Pro Portable Kerosene Torpedo Heater, heats 29,000 ft.3 building
All-Pro kerosene outdoor construction heaters are for use only with kerosene, No. 1 & 2 diesel fuel oil, JP-8 fuel or
Jet A fuel.
165,000 BTU Kerosene Outdoor Torpedo / Salamander Heater
https://www.metabunk.org/data/MetaMirrorCache/drjudywood.com_articles_DEW_dewpics_pk165t.jpg