Debunking 9/11 myths (Page 4)

The flying Squirrel
The flying Squirrel: Idiots like you Two why these things keep happening , What keep Supporting Corruption any one Who doest bye it , From Professials to Te familys of victims them selves , Still wanting a proper answer , yous go oh tin foil hats , Brain washing at its finest
4 months ago Report
0
The flying Squirrel
The flying Squirrel: oh I should say usefull idiots
lol
4 months ago Report
0
Angry Beaver
Angry Beaver: Geeze, bit harsh, mate. I always stick up for you
(Edited by Angry Beaver)
4 months ago Report
0
The flying Squirrel
The flying Squirrel: No I dont think so dont yous ever pay attention , the familys of the Victims of 911 have never brought the Official report , Into what Happened, There tried heaps of time to get answers to no avail ,
I mean just going around with Tin foil hats that type of stuff seems counter productive
I mean i used to belive it , Wasnt till I started looking into it myself , that you start discovering things that totally contradict , the Offical story
4 months ago Report
0
Angry Beaver
Angry Beaver: Everybody has an agenda, you can't believe everything you read online be it "official" reports or people with an axe to grind
4 months ago Report
0
The flying Squirrel
The flying Squirrel: Whats that suppsed to mean , I can make up my own mind or arnt people allowed to do that
What you think , some one reads some thing online they go oh yeah , Dont think so But whatever go back to your tin foil hats
4 months ago Report
0
The flying Squirrel
The flying Squirrel: Suppose I should of asked who debuked the Vidio , But I suspect hating Just made it up
another coummonist double speak meaning word
lol
4 months ago Report
0
Angry Beaver
Angry Beaver: Ok, I'll leave u be Brian sorry you think I'm an idiot, even after I've defended you several times..that hurts, man
I meant that you can't accept all these conspiracy vids as being the logical explanation, the people who make them are also usually not experts in the field, just people with an axe to grind against the government.
(Edited by Angry Beaver)
4 months ago Report
0
The flying Squirrel
The flying Squirrel: Never asked you to Defend me Bever , I dont need defending but thanks , I just cant handle the Tin foil hat nonsence , It seems to be Used by people who dont understand the topic , i donno
4 months ago Report
0
theHating
theHating: Dont understand what? The fact that no wtc building was rigged with demolitions explosives?
4 months ago Report
1
The flying Squirrel
The flying Squirrel: No obfusation and Physdo arguments , You never said how building 7 fell down In a Semmetic Patten , (Like it was a rigged demmo) HTF would I know , You told Me go read the offical report
That makes semce to you , One Main Supporting colllum is Weakend by fire , Yet , Building falls In on its self , IE Like a classic demo
So go on tell me with your Physido Argument ,
4 months ago Report
0
The flying Squirrel
The flying Squirrel: But you and bever Know How stupid of me
4 months ago Report
0
The flying Squirrel
The flying Squirrel: Dumb stupid Patroinising Yank Just like all the others
4 months ago Report
0
Angry Beaver
Angry Beaver: How did the fires cause WTC 7 to collapse?

The heat from the uncontrolled fires caused steel floor beams and girders to thermally expand, leading to a chain of events that caused a key structural column to fail. The failure of this structural column then initiated a fire-induced progressive collapse of the entire building.

According to the report's probable collapse sequence, heat from the uncontrolled fires caused thermal expansion of the steel beams on the lower floors of the east side of WTC 7, damaging the floor framing on multiple floors.

Eventually, a girder on Floor 13 lost its connection to a critical column, Column 79, that provided support for the long floor spans on the east side of the building (see Diagram 1). The displaced girder and other local fire-induced damage caused Floor 13 to collapse, beginning a cascade of floor failures down to the 5th floor. Many of these floors had already been at least partially weakened by the fires in the vicinity of Column 79. This collapse of floors left Column 79 insufficiently supported in the east-west direction over nine stories.

The unsupported Column 79 then buckled and triggered an upward progression of floor system failures that reached the building's east penthouse. What followed in rapid succession was a series of structural failures. Failure first occurred all the way to the roof line-involving all three interior columns on the easternmost side of the building (79, 80, 81). Then, progressing from east to west across WTC 7, all of the columns failed in the core of the building (58 through 78). Finally, the entire façade collapsed.
Typical WTC 7 floor showing locations of columns (numbered).
Diagram 1-Typical WTC 7 floor showing locations of columns (numbered). The buckling of Column 79 was the initiating event that led to the collapse of WTC 7. The buckling resulted from fire-induced damage to floors around column 79, failure of the girder between Columns 79 and 44, and cascading floor failures.

Why did WTC 7 collapse, while no other known building in history has collapsed due to fires alone?

The collapse of WTC 7 is the first known instance of a tall building brought down primarily by uncontrolled fires. The fires in WTC 7 were similar to those that have occurred in several tall buildings where the automatic sprinklers did not function or were not present. These other buildings, including Philadelphia's One Meridian Plaza, a 38-story skyscraper that burned for 18 hours in 1991, did not collapse due to differences in the design of the structural system.

Factors contributing to WTC 7's collapse included: the thermal expansion of building elements such as floor beams and girders, which occurred at temperatures hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in current practice for fire-resistance ratings; significant magnification of thermal expansion effects due to the long-span floors in the building; connections between structural elements that were designed to resist the vertical forces of gravity, not the thermally induced horizontal or lateral loads; and an overall structural system not designed to prevent fire-induced progressive collapse.

Some people have said that a failure at one column should not have produced a symmetrical fall like this one. What's your answer to those assertions?

WTC 7's collapse, viewed from the exterior (most videos were taken from the north), did appear to fall almost uniformly as a single unit. This occurred because the interior failures that took place did not cause the exterior framing to fail until the final stages of the building collapse. The interior floor framing and columns collapsed downward and pulled away from the exterior frame. There were clues that internal damage was taking place, prior to the downward movement of the exterior frame, such as when the east penthouse fell downward into the building and windows broke out on the north face at the ends of the building core. The symmetric appearance of the downward fall of the WTC 7 was primarily due to the greater stiffness and strength of its exterior frame relative to the interior framing.

Whole article:
https://www.nist.gov/pba/questions-and-answers-about-nist-wtc-7-investigation
3 months ago Report
0
The flying Squirrel
The flying Squirrel: write all that your self did you obivously
3 months ago Report
0
Angry Beaver
Angry Beaver: No I got it off the gov't investigation site of course, as you can see
(Edited by Angry Beaver)
3 months ago Report
0
The flying Squirrel
The flying Squirrel: Sorry dont belive , The Govermnet Investigation Or some Govenment Stooge , Nor do I belive any of the others There Put out over the Years , Reguarding Assinations and a Lot of other Things ,
Funny How the Wole lot was Insured , and They collected before any rusults were even Published
3 months ago Report
0
Angry Beaver
Angry Beaver: just putting it up there for discussion, I really don't give a fuck either way

How many people would have to be in on a cover up such as you say it is?
Hundreds? Thousands?
Not possible dude
(Edited by Angry Beaver)
3 months ago Report
0
The flying Squirrel
The flying Squirrel: Yeah I read the report , Dont really make sence to Me , Load of Obfusating by some one Who prolly thought he would get Heaps of Public Contracts ,
They Prolly Just threw him too the wolves LOL
3 months ago Report
0
The flying Squirrel
The flying Squirrel: Thats why I Said building 7 in the first , Place But any hoo
3 months ago Report
0
The flying Squirrel
3 months ago Report
0
The flying Squirrel
3 months ago Report
0
theHating
theHating: "oh, so you just buy everything the experts tell you?"

*Repeats popular debunked mantras*

3 months ago Report
0
The flying Squirrel
The flying Squirrel: Gee that made a lot of sence . Don't tell me you live in America the fantasy land . Of us against them .
3 months ago Report
0
theHating
theHating: Squirrel posts a video pandering the controlled demolition narrative but expects us not to debunk it because he "isnt necessarily claiming it was a controlled demo" and just that we are idiots for believing in experts, witnesses, and thousands of peer-reviewed analyses that support the theory of uncontrolled office fires and structurally weakened support columns...

Im sorry, but at this point I'm still wondering what squirrel thinks contradicts the official story other than he "just doesnt feel like" heat could not weaken steel and the building shouldnt "fall like that", however it fell. I guess we dont need words to describe it if we can just watch a video, makes sense to me.. let me see if i can see any demolitions men running about... Oh, well, i see people, they are running.. like that... Like in the video. Do you like my account of the video?

Let's see, last Thursday we watched a horse movie, where the horse jumped off a cliff, landed "like that" and the best i could glean was that clearly, gravity was not involved in this horse's plight. idk squirrel do you have anything specifically to your specifications of quality info that could debunk the offical story? Like specifically anything NEW that hasn't been pandered and debunked for the last 20 years?
3 months ago Report
0