Upgrade your browser!

Skip to Content

WTC7 Collapse Was Due Primarily To Fire

Successful demolitions require that all structural support collumns collapse at virtually the same time

  • Views: 496
  • All Ages
  • All Ages

Related Media

  • Video:Surprise Party
  • Surprise Party
  • The Guy Should Have Made It To The Party Earlier, So H. . .
  • Votes 4.33/5 - Views 480 - Comments 4

View All



Trouble playing the media? Click here to manually download it.

Rate This Video:
Rate it 0.5 Rate it 1.0 Rate it 1.5 Rate it 2.0 Rate it 2.5 Rate it 3.0 Rate it 3.5 Rate it 4.0 Rate it 4.5 Rate it 5.0

3.59 out of 5 based on 148 votes

Rating Results:
Earn XP by sharing this video!
learn more

Video URL:

Embedded Link:

Send This Video To A Cell Phone! Digg

15 Comments

Current View: 15 / Show all Comments

sato : LVL 19: VP 2.8: said:

sato

3 votes NegativePositive

59 days 9 hours ago...

i could accept that the building collapsed due to fire if i was told how the fire led to that style of collapse we all saw, which so far i haven`t. so far just all "fire led to collapse" with no middle.

MaxPowers_00001 : LVL 28: VP 3.7: said:

MaxPowers_00001

7 votes NegativePositive

59 days 9 hours ago...

psh... we all know whos fault it was : terrorists, alqaida, osama bin laden, saddam hussein, iraqi`s, irani`s, pakistanis, afganistanis, extremists, suicide bombers, kamikazies, spys, cult leaders, flag burners, the devil, global warming, athiests communists, non-christians, jihad, some puerto rican guy, and buildings that accidently fall down on thier own.

duh...

Dweebster : LVL 18: VP 2.7: said:

Dweebster

-1 votes NegativePositive

59 days 8 hours ago...

@sato: When steel heats up it gets weak. When 1 of 55 steel columns buckles, the remaining 54 take its weight. Now that they are all under higher stress, they become more likely to break, especially if they are hot due to fire. Now, two more break, and then four more, then 16 more... etc. Not too hard to understand.
EDIT: The above is called Catastrophic Beam Failure due to Euler Buckling.

I am tired of people saying it looks like a controlled demolition, because it doesn`t, at all. Look at the video at 1:20. Just because the narrator says, "It falls evenly", doesn`t mean it does. You can clearly see the left side of the building topple forward and then the stress that causes makes that wall spring back upright. Further, the back of the building clearly doesn`t fall at the same time as the front, because you can see it.

This is the same thing as that dumb loose change movie... people let the narrator tell them what they are seeing instead of putting the video on mute and watching what they are seeing for themselves.

To the `Truthists`: If you are going to argue matters of engineering, get a f%@$ing Engineering Degree.

dude_from_detroit : LVL 10: VP 1.9: said:

dude_from_detroit

-3 votes NegativePositive

59 days 8 hours ago...

see, he`s right, the only thing that needed to happen was all 64 support collumns to buckle within a second

dude_from_detroit : LVL 10: VP 1.9: said:

dude_from_detroit

-3 votes NegativePositive

59 days 8 hours ago...

^^www.ae911truth.org

Tada : LVL 40: VP 4.8: said:

Tada

3 votes NegativePositive

59 days 7 hours ago...

Dweebster: Any reliable sources which can prove your idea of how it happened? To me it just sound like you`re guessing and reasoning on your own based on the conclusion FEMA made. Not saying you`re wrong but you should at least have evidence to back your claims up if you actually want to win against truthers.

dude_from_detroit : LVL 10: VP 1.9: said:

dude_from_detroit

0 votes NegativePositive

59 days 7 hours ago...

no you said you wanted truthers with engineering degrees, and if you browse that site you`ll find plenty, are you an engineer dweeb?

NYCJockCub : LVL 42: VP 5: said:

NYCJockCub

-1 votes NegativePositive

59 days 7 hours ago...

I`ve been saying this on this site for years:

It seems to me that WTC7 came down because of fire in the electrical substation that was in it`s basement. There was huge fire in the building anyway, so it`s not a stretch to think the fire, having all afternoon to burn in the building, might have led to explosions in the gas tanks in the substation all on its own, or the heat from the fire from burning backup tanks was hot enough to weaken the structure. It was the last building to come down - it fell around 3pm or so if i`m remembering? It`s perfectly reasonable the building came down on its own.

I`m not an expert, but I do have an (electrical) engineering degree, and obviously the whole deal was (only slightly) more personal deal to me, since I lived down here during the attacks. And no, I wasn`t involved in orchestrating the 9/11 attacks, before any 9/11 conspiracy guys start getting all crazy up in here.

Our electrical substation was rebuilt in the new WTC7 building. If you`ve been to Ground Zero, you`ll recognize it immediately; the first 7 floors of the building have no windows, and is covered with steel grating (an attempt to dissaude any other terrorist attacks on the substation).

If I was a 9/11 conspiracy proponent, I`d argue that the gas tanks were exploded on purpose to destroy the FBI offices that were in WTC7. But I`m not, and it`s not my job to focus the 9/11 Truthers movement into something more coherent (and marketable).

SantaAndFriends : LVL 35: VP 4.3: said:

SantaAndFriends

0 votes NegativePositive

59 days 6 hours ago...

Meh.

dude_from_detroit : LVL 10: VP 1.9: said:

dude_from_detroit

-4 votes NegativePositive

59 days 6 hours ago...

it`s funny that you dont think the fbi could do all that in their own building,WTC7. who is gonna tell on them?(not to mention there was fiber optic cable construction in progress)

cheers to that reliable source of knowledge
keep usin u bwain

Dweebster : LVL 18: VP 2.7: said:

Dweebster

-3 votes NegativePositive

59 days 6 hours ago...

This is annoying. Deleted all my crap but my original post.

Tada : LVL 40: VP 4.8: said:

Tada

3 votes NegativePositive

59 days 6 hours ago...

Dweebster: Don`t worry I`m not saying the truthers are right or anything like that, just that your word weights about as much as the pixels that show them to me here when you say "I have a theory based on my own reasoning and have no evidence or sources to back it up!". It`s just that I`ve learned from experience that you shouldn`t trust any one with "a theory" when you`re on THE INTERNET.

dude_from_detroit : LVL 10: VP 1.9: said:

dude_from_detroit

-2 votes NegativePositive

59 days 6 hours ago...

we patiently await your approval

Dweebster : LVL 18: VP 2.7: said:

Dweebster

-7 votes NegativePositive

59 days 6 hours ago...

That was the same reasoning I used when I deleted my post. I hate arguing on the internets.

Tada : LVL 40: VP 4.8: said:

Tada

2 votes NegativePositive

59 days 5 hours ago...

dude_from_detroit: Isn`t that the whole point of trying to convince people, getting their approval? Learn how to sell an idea you fucking moron.

Post a Comment:

Avatar


The Spikedhumor Drawing!Spiked Humor Playstation 3 Contest
Prize
Entry Dates: 4/15/2008-6/15/2008