Christian Theologian says WTC towers were demolished, cites evidence

[runningman]

Re: Christian Theologian says WTC towers were demolished, cites evidence

delirious you still never answered the question who did it?? the US Government or the Illuminati?? Quit hiding behind how fast the building fell because there are numerous facts about how the building was meant to fall as if it was a controlled explosion so not to wreck all of manhattan..

[Jenks]

Re: Christian Theologian says WTC towers were demolished, cites evidence

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

BYU

[daveman]

Re: Christian Theologian says WTC towers were demolished, cites evidence

oh man. i stayed outta this thead for a reason, but i have a background in architecture and graduated from the university of which one of the designers of the new freedom tower and complex taught. maybe i can help sum it all up.

i have heard a couple of conspiritors site similar articles and stories much like the original post of this thread. they make for interesting reading, but don't hold much credit.
i watched that eventfull day live on tv from shortly after the first plane hit. I got a call from a friend of mine from the UK who told me to turn on the tv and that a building was hit by a plane. my first responce was "did it fall over." all i got was no and go turn on the tv. i knew that if the initial impact couldn't take the building down it was going to stay up. from there i sat with the rest of the world watching the events unfold. i too was amazed at how "cleanly" (for lack of a better word) that the buildings fell. i have personally witnessed a building being imploded and it was very similar. because of how cleanly the two buildings fell it is easy to believe a lot of the stories of external forces other than the planes taking the buildings down.

lets me just start off saying that NY is one of the most difficult states to pass the licencing exam for architecture, mainly due to extra questions having to do with the structure of skyscrapers. on top of that, the united states has some of the worlds most difficult codes to enforce as far as construction, building, and life safety are concerned.

there are a couple of factors that have to be addressed when designing a building of this size/height. the first are the loads involved, but i will try to simplify it. there are dead loads and live loads that make up the weight of the building itself, all the furniture and occupants inside, and any snow or water sitting on the building. these loads are easy to understand because they are based on gravity only for the most part, and all the energy is going to be pulling down. there are also windloads that become a major factor for any building of a substantial height. these loads get really tricky to work with. basically the wind is going to always want to push the building over. because of this the building needs to have a little play, or a little bit of room to sway. if this building or any building for that matter was built totally rigid, the suttle movement would eventually start to crack portions of the building and the structure would fail. so in order to create some looseness in the building you will have two types of connections at all structural points. solid connections and pin connections. the pin connections hold structure from forces like gravity pulling the building down while at the same time allow for a little sway with the wind. in NYC the code says that buildings also have to be designed to withstand a crash from a 727. the planes that hit the WTC were not the first planes to hit a building, and not the first even for NYC. back in the 1920's or 30's a small plane crashed into the empire state building starting a large fire and killing a couple dozen. i don't know a lot about how the loads are calculated or distributed through the building in the event of a plane crash, but i would imagine that the exterior frame and sheathing of the building has more to do with it than the internal structure of the building. i'm not going to try to explain this one since i don't know much about it, but like i said before, the building should have been designed to deal with it. Now the design of the WTC buildings were fairly momentus for its time. they were the second and third largest buildings in the world once completed. using newer forms of construction where the stucture was kept internally and not all along the outter walls was the way to go then. but due to the height of the buildings they had more structure on the exteral skin of the building than most of the buildings of their time. this skeleton of structure generated the lines and design that was the building. i don't think anyone could say that these buildings were built unconventionally or in a flimsy manner. hopefully that sums up the structural portion.

now lets move on to fire codes and life saftey, of which, again the USA has some some of the strictest in the world. all buildings have firewalls and those walls have fire ratings. the fire rating is controlled by an independent comany that does nothing but try to figure out how long certain construction details will burn before getting destroyed. then you factor in that anytime you have a building over three stories the building has to be sprinklered or fitted with some sort of fire suppression system. the prinipal of the fire wall is to contain fire to the smallest area, and keep areas of escape and rescue clear of fire and smoke for as long as possible until the fire is under control or put out.

With this background info it should be a little easier to understand what happened.

first off a large plane hits the building. you have a force similar to a wind force in that it is from the side. this kind of force is the end all kinda force that the terrorist hoped would topple the building over causing a domino effect of destruction that would have made the current hole in the ground cover most of southern NYC. knowing that the initial force of the plane wasn't enough to tear it down it was fairly safe to say that the building wasn't going to go down. therefore you get what we had with fire crews still entering the buildings and confusion as to how safe the buildings were. now fire breaks out. not just any fire but jet fuel fire like you all know. it burned out of control at at least twice the temp of a standard fire. this could have been, and probably was the downfall of the building codes. the codes were based on fire, not high octain fuel fire. another section to the fire code is that structure can't be exposed. the point of this is so that you wouldn't have fire melting structural connections. unfortunately the jet fuel burned hot enough to reach certain structural connections and melt them. possibly through the concrete that surrounded them as protection.

what you end up with is a couple of factors that lead to disaster. once the fire melted the pin connections (see above) near the exterior walls of the buildings they probably melted out fairly quickly. due the nature of a pin connection they are usually not the strongest connection anyway. once these structural connections were broken the sway of the building was no longer being held together by the pin connection. so you end up with all the other structural points (along the inside of the building) moving in ways that they were not designed to move. once one floor or level gives way the loads associated with live and deadloads start moving. once these forces start the building is done for. so you take one floor of the building that falls with all the pin connections at the outter walls melted away and you end up with a very clean teardown. the areas where the pin connections were found were the connection between the rigid frame of the exterior and the rigid structure of the internal skeleton. once they failed the internal skeleton fell under the pressure of the floors above while the outter rigid walls stood until they were dragged down by the internal portions of the building.

i feel that the conclusion reached by the officials involved made a lot of sense. in times where the world is literally stuck with its pants down people will always look for additional factors or causes. at the end of the day it was a safe building, it was unfortunate that there was a comunication breakdown that lead to so many deaths. RIP

[runningman]

Re: Christian Theologian says WTC towers were demolished, cites evidence

like those explosions popping out of windows couldn't be a section of floor dropping causing massive pressure to blow out the windows.. the destruction in there must have been immense..

BYU..

doesn't get any better then that..

[Jenks]

Re: Christian Theologian says WTC towers were demolished, cites evidence

Excellent post Daveman!












































but it's not going to be enough for Delirious.

[daveman]

Re: Christian Theologian says WTC towers were demolished, cites evidence

^^^ thanks, someone pm'ed me and asked for my input. i'm glad it made sense.

[thesightless]

Re: Christian Theologian says WTC towers were demolished, cites evidence

kerwality.

but right now there is a vetinary orthopedic surgeon who says he has more knowledge than you

[delirious]

Re: Christian Theologian says WTC towers were demolished, cites evidence

once one floor or level gives way the loads associated with live and deadloads start moving. once these forces start the building is done for. so you take one floor of the building that falls with all the pin connections at the outter walls melted away and you end up with a very clean teardown. the areas where the pin connections were found were the connection between the rigid frame of the exterior and the rigid structure of the internal skeleton. once they failed the internal skeleton fell under the pressure of the floors above while the outter rigid walls stood until they were dragged down by the internal portions of the building.

Really good post!!!

However, these floors would fall down onto 80 floors that were not melting, with the steel intact. How could all these 80 floors of concrete give little or no resistance?

Pancaking is the result to be proved, not a premise. The NIST avoided modeling the official “progressive pancake collapse” theory for the embarrassing reason that such a model would conflict with all the data, especially near-free-fall-speed in all three skyscraper collapses, a signature of demolition. The NIST failure to model and support pancaking signifies “the collapse of the pancake theory,” as A.K. Dewdney says. “[N]o video of either of the WTC collapses shows any sign of stutter between floor collapses,” writes physicist Derrick Grimmer, “which should have been very apparent especially in the first few floors of collapse when the speed of gravitational collapse was small”

Morgan Reynolds

[daveman]

Re: Christian Theologian says WTC towers were demolished, cites evidence

delirious, i can't give a better explaination than what i said earlier. but like i said the internal structure of the building was designed to take the live and dead loads for each level. once one level falls it takes its own weight and the force is multiplied by the speed it is moving. if all the connections at the outter walls were pin connections. which probably were and had to be to deal with the wind loads. they would be the first to fail. then the rigid construction of the skeletal frame inside the building couldn't take this kind of movement. it would break apart like anything brittle under presure. you can't really look at it as if each level fell one by one. more like the inside fell apart due to outter connections failing, then the internal part of the building pulled the outter structure down. as far as why there was no resistance from floor to floor. i can only speculate so i won't. this was a unique collapse and it is hard to make anything but speculation.

[delirious]

Re: Christian Theologian says WTC towers were demolished, cites evidence

as far as why there was no resistance from floor to floor. i can only speculate so i won't. this was a unique collapse and it is hard to make anything but speculation.

That's what I came here for - for someone to explain the science of such a theory.

The free-fall speed could only occur if either (1) concrete violated the law of resistance or (2) the building's support columns 80 floors below the impact were destroyed, causing the bottom floors to give almost no resistance.

So even if the inner core did collapse due to the steel being melted, as you described, and the bottom floors for some reason gave no resistance, what would cause the formation of molten steel (at 1500-1900 degrees) for weeks and the energy required to convert most of the buildings to fine dust?

The demolition theory, on the other hand, explains the speed at which the towers fell, as well as these anomolies including the molten steel found in all 3 buildings.

Personally, I have an open mind as neither theory has really convinced me so if someone can explain the free-fall speed, I'll be very happy to listen. So far demolition is the only theory which can explain it.

[daveman]

Re: Christian Theologian says WTC towers were demolished, cites evidence

So even if the inner core did collapse due to the steel being melted, as you described, and the bottom floors gave no resistance, what would cause the formation of molten steel (at 1500-1900 degrees) and the energy required to convert most of the buildings to fine dust?

Personally, I have an open mind as neither theory has really convinced me.

i agree that one should have an open mind to addition theories. thinking about things in new ways could provide possible solutions for problems that have little to do with the original problem.

but i quoted you misunderstanding what i was saying. this is about impossible to describe without a sketch but here we go again. you have the internal structure that is rigid (really weak to any movement). then there is the external frame structure that made up the facade of the building, another rigid structure (can't move much). the connections holding them together is what failed. it is the pin connection i was talking about. in any structural system it will always be the one that fails first. the problem is that if the whole building was rigid the movement caused by the wind would cause the building to fall. once the pin connections failed the two rigid systems start to move and hit each other. this movement caused the internal structure to fall apart and it took the external structural system with it. your concrete theories, although partially valid, don't matter as much as you might think. once the internal structure started to fail it was done for. the internal structure was engineered to work as one large column, if you will. once a part of that rigid structure goes there is nothing that will stop it. if the fire suppression systems would have worked well the pin connections would have never failed and the internal structure would not have ever experienced the loads that it was never designed to take.

i'm glad that you are interested in finding more info on the physics and structure involved, but be weary of most of what you read or hear. everyone was/is looking to make a name for themselves or some money out of a catastrophe like this.

we were joking around watching the images on TV that day that all the big name architects were probably drawing on their TV screens. who wouldn't want to become a piece of the history. including anyone with a theory of thier own.

[delirious]

Re: Christian Theologian says WTC towers were demolished, cites evidence

Firstly, much respect to your well thought out posts.

your concrete theories, although partially valid, don't matter as much as you might think. once the internal structure started to fail it was done for. the internal structure was engineered to work as one large column, if you will. once a part of that rigid structure goes there is nothing that will stop it.

Can you link to a scientific model which shows how this possible? (ie one which explains the characterics detailed above - freefall, molten steel, fine dust etc)

who wouldn't want to become a piece of the history. including anyone with a theory of thier own.

Agreed, but only if the theory turns out to be true.

From the official NIST report:

NIST contracted with Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. to conduct tests to obtain information on the fire endurance of trusses like those in the WTC towers…. All four test specimens sustained the maximum design load for approximately 2 hours without collapsing

(NIST, 2005, p. 141; emphasis added.)

A link to a scientific paper detailing the theory proposed would be helpful

[asdf_admin]

Re: Christian Theologian says WTC towers were demolished, cites evidence

lot's of good posts in here and a very good topic. i am no professional in this subject, but the concept of slamming a plane into a building and have it fall down is a little too perfect. not once but a second time just seems too crazy even from a scientific view.

there is a lot knowledge to be known ... jet fuel burns at a high temperature ... to know the faults and weakness of a given building ... etc. now i hope in my own faith and the faith of others that the USA did not use it's own people against itself. that seems a little far fetched to me, but fuck this world is crazy, and anything is really possible.

i believe and agree on the fact the buildings faults and weakness were somehow determined, perhaps even calculated. these people ... "t's" consist of chemists, brokers, structural engineers, etc. These are not stupid people who planned this attack. also anything can be bought with $. anything.

this was a very well calculated attack and even the execution was flawless. a very scary event, and perhaps the most horrific thing i have ever watched on live tv.

we all must remember hate is a very powerful emotion. it can allow man or woman to kill each other over the lines in land, over symbols and even color. the power of hate is too very strong. these are not dumb bastards ... these hateful people that want to see the US crumble as in to watch the Roman empire fall.

anything is possible. but my money is on Osama, double or nothing. He is one evil mother fucker. and when you tie faith into a hate ... a man can and will do everything if he will be rewarded by his higher power.

history has proven this over and over.

[AntonyM]

Re: Christian Theologian says WTC towers were demolished, cites evidence

Best Discourse on a topic yet.
Gravity can really get you down sometimes.

[Yao]

Re: Christian Theologian says WTC towers were demolished, cites evidence

what part of :"""they were designed to fall like that""" arent you understadning.

god cape town needs a dirty bomb.

Mind you language please Sightless, you're pushing it.

@ Daveman & Delirious:

I understand the arguments of both of you, now I have a question: wouldn't it be possible, or maybe even probable, that if a collapse occurs, this would start first at the point where the structure has suffered the most damage? This would in my view mean that it might start in the places where the planes hit the buildings, where the 'entrance wound' was the biggest - this would also mean an asymmetrical collapse, even with the core designed to 'implode' in case of collapse (because i'm pretty sure this was designed in reaction to internal factors such as fire started within the building).

Furthermore, because of this asymmetrical damage to the building, it still strikes me as strange that the floors fell down pretty much level.

Is this such a weird thought?