WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall
#1
Posted 08 December 2008 - 05:59 PM
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
Posted 08 December 2008 - 06:16 PM
You leftist wacko's are a piece of work.
#3
Posted 08 December 2008 - 06:42 PM
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
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?
#6
Posted 09 December 2008 - 10:57 AM
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
Posted 10 December 2008 - 11:56 PM
#8
Posted 11 December 2008 - 09:05 AM
#9
Posted 11 December 2008 - 09:23 AM
#10
Posted 11 December 2008 - 09:25 AM
#11
Posted 11 December 2008 - 03:22 PM
#12
Posted 11 December 2008 - 04:33 PM
#13
Posted 11 December 2008 - 07:44 PM
#14
Posted 11 December 2008 - 09:59 PM
#15
Posted 11 December 2008 - 10:52 PM
1 - What does the wacko have to necessitate the apostrophe s?
2 - You rightist wackos are a piece of work as well.
But you trust the government?
Do you trust eye witness accounts?
I do trust eyewitness accounts, when I know the eyewitness. For example, I have a friend who worked in the pentagon on 9-11. He saw debris from the attack, and knows it was a plane, not a missile as some fools have said. What I don't post is some random guy I never heard of posting a youtube video that puts out a bunch of random cut and paste crap and calls it journalism.
Edited by Davidson Deac II, 11 December 2008 - 10:57 PM.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users






