Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
33 replies to this topic

#1 RockECU

RockECU

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 04-December 08
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 669
  • Reputation: 5
HUDDLER

Posted 08 December 2008 - 05:59 PM

For all of you doubters, some SCIENCE to back up claims regarding 9/11.
From architects and engineers for 9/11 truth.

"In its draft report, released in August 2008, NIST attempted to cover up evidence that WTC7 fell at freefall, but the coverup was transparent. In its final report, released in November 2008, NIST finally acknowledged freefall, but couched it in a bizarre framework that continues to deny its clear significance. ae911truth"

watch video here regarding this:
http://www.youtube.com/user/ae911truth

#2 stankowalski

stankowalski

    A Hard Walker

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,034
  • Reputation: 242
HUDDLER

Posted 08 December 2008 - 06:16 PM

Yeah, yeah, Bush planted the bombs, Cheney pushed the button...we get it.

You leftist wacko's are a piece of work.

#3 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 18,130
  • Reputation: 1,529
HUDDLER

Posted 08 December 2008 - 06:42 PM

I don't trust youtube videos. I have yet to see one (news related) that was worth the bandwidth it used. I do however, trust these guys who did a lot of research and backed up conclusions with actual verifiable information.

NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse

According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."

There are two other possible contributing factors still under investigation: First, trusses on the fifth and seventh floors were designed to transfer loads from one set of columns to another. With columns on the south face apparently damaged, high stresses would likely have been communicated to columns on the building's other faces, thereby exceeding their load-bearing capacities.

Second, a fifth-floor fire burned for up to 7 hours. "There was no firefighting in WTC 7," Sunder says. Investigators believe the fire was fed by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency generators. Most tanks throughout the building were fairly small, but a generator on the fifth floor was connected to a large tank in the basement via a pressurized line. Says Sunder: "Our current working hypothesis is that this pressurized line was supplying fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time."

WTC 7 might have withstood the physical damage it received, or the fire that burned for hours, but those combined factors — along with the building's unusual construction — were enough to set off the chain-reaction collapse.


But those that believe in this kind of stuff just believe those that disagree with them are blind or part of the conspiracy.

#4 RockECU

RockECU

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 04-December 08
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 669
  • Reputation: 5
HUDDLER

Posted 09 December 2008 - 10:48 AM

Yeah, yeah, Bush planted the bombs, Cheney pushed the button...we get it.

You leftist wacko's are a piece of work.


1 - What does the wacko have to necessitate the apostrophe s?
2 - You rightist wackos are a piece of work as well.

I don't trust youtube videos.


But you trust the government?

Do you trust eye witness accounts?

#5 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 18,256
  • Reputation: 6,623
Administrators

Posted 09 December 2008 - 10:52 AM

I'll look forward to reading such big news in tomorrow's NY times.

#6 RockECU

RockECU

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 04-December 08
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 669
  • Reputation: 5
HUDDLER

Posted 09 December 2008 - 10:57 AM

...might want to consider a different paper soon...

http://www.iht.com/a...ess/08times.php

"The New York Times Company plans to borrow up to $225 million against its mid-Manhattan headquarters building, to ease a potential cash flow squeeze as the company grapples with tighter credit and shrinking profits."

#7 Fiz

Fiz

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 11,063
  • Reputation: 878
HUDDLER

Posted 10 December 2008 - 11:56 PM

Posted Image

#8 Carolina Husker

Carolina Husker

    I hate football

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 10,538
  • Reputation: 394
HUDDLER

Posted 11 December 2008 - 09:05 AM

Posted Image

#9 Falcons1stPanthers2nd

Falcons1stPanthers2nd

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,167
  • Reputation: 207
HUDDLER

Posted 11 December 2008 - 09:23 AM

9+1+1 is 11 11 is the age of my little cousin. then you take 1+1 which is 2. Which was 9 years ago from when he was 2. 9+1=10 1 year less than his age. you add one and you get 11. 9/11. My cousin did 9/11!!!

#10 Carolina Husker

Carolina Husker

    I hate football

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 10,538
  • Reputation: 394
HUDDLER

Posted 11 December 2008 - 09:25 AM

You should scold him.

#11 Samuel L. Jackson

Samuel L. Jackson

    Banned

  • Joined: 26-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,407
  • Reputation: 1
Banned

Posted 11 December 2008 - 03:22 PM

[ame][/ame]

#12 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 24,866
  • Reputation: 2,555
SUPPORTER

Posted 11 December 2008 - 04:33 PM

I give it 8 stars, it's got a good beat and it's easy to dance to -