WTC7 - Can YOU Spot The Difference?

gerrycan

Banned
Banned
That divergence shows the sensitivity of the models, and the error in insisting that there be one crucial make-or break event that the entire collapse hinges upon.

The models really don't have enough level of detail for such precision. Only the first one comes close, and that's super limited in scope.

Basically I think they were limited by time and budgets.
But both ansys and lsdyna are capable of modelling these elements, which makes the statement by NIST a strange one indeed. The models that they used are very limited looking though and do not support their own conclusions. As for time and financial constraints, I agree there, but some of the errors that they made were so basic that there are no excuses. ie 11/12" mistakes, elements missing etc etc
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
But both ansys and lsdyna are capable of modelling these elements, which makes the statement by NIST a strange one indeed.

Why don't you write a thread explaining that in depth?

And didn't they explain the 11/12 was just a typo and did not affect the model? If so you can't really hold that up as a huge issue.
 

gerrycan

Banned
Banned
Why don't you write a thread explaining that in depth?

And didn't they explain the 11/12 was just a typo and did not affect the model? If so you can't really hold that up as a huge issue.
A typo that put the walk distance even further, and another corresponding typo that just happened to fit in with their adjusted hypothesis. So given that they made the impossible even more so with their statement, and did not deal with the consequences of that in the statement, then yes, it is a major issue.
As for starting a thread re the inability to model, there's no need, they say it all there in NCSTAR 1-9A
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
A typo that put the walk distance even further, and another corresponding typo that just happened to fit in with their adjusted hypothesis. So given that they made the impossible even more so with their statement, and did not deal with the consequences of that in the statement, then yes, it is a major issue.
As for starting a thread re the inability to model, there's no need, they say it all there in NCSTAR 1-9A

I mean explaining why you think their explanation is wrong. Debunk it.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I mean your claim "But both ansys and lsdyna are capable of modelling these elements, which makes the statement by NIST a strange one indeed."

Can you give a technical debunking of the NIST statement (including the actual NIST statement)?
 

gerrycan

Banned
Banned
I will do that at some point yes, but there are elements that exist in the models which are comparable to the ones that NIST claimed an inability to model accurately.
NCSTAR 1-9 page 625 figure 12-25 : tell me if that looks like the connection at column 79 to you.
THEN look at the previous page and figure 12-24. Even their own illustrations contradict each other, but then consider that they model the column 81 connection in fig 12-26. Surely the target size of the top clip is no more than the stiffeners would be?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
You are going to have to point out the "claimed inability" to me. What did they claim, and where did they claim it?
 

gerrycan

Banned
Banned
ok i will try to go over this tomorrow. Alternatively, open the pdf and search for column 79, you will get to it.
 

Ron J

Active Member
Wrong. Steel frame buildings are not susceptible to "lots of other things" that can initiate total structural failure.
In fact there is only one thing they are susceptible to and that is controlled demolition.


Working office buildings are not susceptible to controlled demolition.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
What I like about this thread is the succinct and compact illustration of what I term "the truther fallacy" - if NIST makes any mistakes then that proves that the buildings could only be demolished.
 

Josh Heuer

Active Member
What I like about this thread is the succinct and compact illustration of what I term "the truther fallacy" - if NIST makes any mistakes then that proves that the buildings could only be demolished.
How you jumped straight to that conclusion is beyond me...the point of this thread has NOTHING to do with proving controlled demolition and only one person even brought it up (hiper). It seems like you're the one fixated on controlled demolition. I'm not trying to be rude but I would suggest you reread the OP to get a better understanding of what the thread is about. I don't fully understand but I'm attempting to make sense of all of this.
It's all about those stiffener plates...
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
S NIST's Response to AE911Truth's WTC7 Girder Objection 9/11 73
Oystein Final Report: Hulsey/AE911Truth's WTC7 Study 9/11 26
Joe Hill WTC7: Does This "Look Like" a Controlled Implosion? 9/11 45
Mick West TFTRH #25 - Jason Bermas: Producer of Loose Change, Shade, Invisible Empire Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 1
Oystein Debunked: AE911T: CNBC Anchor Ron Insana claims Building 7 a Controlled Implosion 9/11 13
Mick West Sept 3, 2019 release of Hulsey's WTC7 draft report: Analysis 9/11 183
Pepijn van Erp WTC7: Determining the Accelerations involved - Methods and Accuracy 9/11 41
Mick West A wider perspective on the WTC7 collapse 9/11 2
Mick West Some New-ish WTC7 Photos (and video?) Corner Damage 9/11 6
Mick West Debunked: NIST's Lack of Explanation for WTC7 Freefall [They Have One - Column Buckling] 9/11 38
Jedo Debunked: WTC7 was the only building not on the WTC block that had a fire on 9/11 9/11 0
Mick West WTC7 South Side Photos 9/11 2
Mick West WTC7 Smoke Movement Before and After Penthouse Collapse 9/11 7
John85 How could the interior collapse in WTC7 Move West Without More Visible Exterior Damage 9/11 63
Mick West WTC7: Is AE911's (and NIST's) Focus on A2001 Justified if it Was Not "Key" in NIST's Global Model? 9/11 181
Mick West WTC7 Penthouse Falling Window Wave 9/11 65
Jeffrey Orling The Role of Diesel Fuel in WTC7 9/11 12
Mick West First Interstate Tower Fire - Comparison with WTC Towers and WTC7 9/11 5
Mick West Kai Kostack's WTC7 Collapse Simulation using BCB and Blender 9/11 10
Mick West Have You Actually READ the NIST Report on Building 7? 9/11 12
Mick West How Hot Could The WTC7 Fires Burned, and How Hot could the Steel be? 9/11 2
gerrycan Did NIST examine Steel from WTC7? 9/11 16
gerrycan Movement of Column 79 as Expressed in WTC7 UAF Presentation 9/11 13
Mick West Debunked: UAF Study Shows WTC7 Could Not Have Collapsed from Fire 9/11 43
Mick West Debunked: CIA Agent Confesses On Deathbed: ‘We Blew Up WTC7 On 9/11’ [HOAX] 9/11 12
Whitebeard Tehran Plasco Highrise Fire And Collapse - 9/11 WTC7, WTC1&2 Comparisons 9/11 84
Cube Radio What is this woman hearing as WTC7 collapses behind her 9/11 40
Mick West How Buckling Led to "Free Fall" acceleration for part of WTC7's Collapse. 9/11 129
benthamitemetric Other WTC7 Investigations: Aegis Insurance v. 7 World Trade Company Expert Reports 9/11 39
Oystein Debunked: "WTC7 Sound Evidence of Explosions" by Chandler/AE911T 9/11 31
Oystein AE911 Truth's WTC7 Evaluation Computer Modelling Project 9/11 1340
Cube Radio Sulfur at WTC7: how could it come from gypsum as the BBC claimed? 9/11 75
jaydeehess Why little to no analysis of steel from WTC7? 9/11 45
gerrycan AE911 Letter to Inspector General Claims NIST WTC7 Report is Provably False 9/11 161
Ron J WTC7 Firefighting 9/11 48
Cairenn The plausibility of demolishing WTC7 with explosives on 9/11 9/11 429
Oxymoron How much of the Smoke Around WTC7 actually from WTC7? 9/11 20
Mick West What would a new WTC7 Collapse Investigation look like? 9/11 127
mynym WTC7 and other Buildings, the Significance of Sheer Studs 9/11 1
Representative Press WTC7 Fire Temperatures and effects on the East Floor System 9/11 58
Representative Press Significance of WTC7 9/11 36
ColtCabana FDNY Chief Daniel Nigro's statement on WTC7 9/11 135
gerrycan Critical Errors and Omissions in WTC7 Report Uncovered 9/11 841
Alchemist How could WTC7 Possible have fallen like it did? 9/11 319
Josh Heuer The Uniqueness of the WTC7 Collapse 9/11 528
Oxymoron WTC4 fire photo labeled as WTC7 on 911 memorial timeline site. 9/11 60
Mick West Debunked: WTC7 vs. Chechnya's Tallest Building Fire (Grozny-City Complex) 9/11 24
Mick West Does NIST not testing for explosives and not testing WTC7 steel invalidate everything 9/11 246
Mick West Debunked: AE911Truth's WTC7 Explosive Demolition Hypothesis 9/11 175
Tazmanian Debunked: 9/11 Melted cars near WTC7 9/11 79
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top