WTC7 again.

**MadPict** · 28-Feb-07, 17:19

Roy,
Thanks. If you look at the profile of the building in the BBC "report" you will note it has a stepped structure on the roof. If you then look at the aerial shot of the building on Murray/W Broadway you will notice it has a roof top structure also which appears to cover as much roof space. I therefore suggest that the two buildings are one and the same.

Note: The satellite image is skewed due to the pass over the area being staggered, not becuase the buildings are leaning....

**MadPict** · 28-Feb-07, 17:22

Changilass,
The building collapsed as it did due to the floors below giving way under the weight of the collapsing floors above them.
This also accounts for the theory that "explosions" were seen (as puffs of 'smoke') below the segment which was collapsing. It was the force of the pressure wave created by the floors above falling actually ejecting debris out of the side of the building.

Several compacted floors and their contents are stored in a building - the remains are about 8 feet thick....

But then the building rigged with explosives sounds so much more intriguing....

**fred** · 28-Feb-07, 18:17

Originally Posted by chimo

The plane that stuck the Empire State building in 1945 was not a 737 Jet, was it? I am also sure that the Twin Towers were built to withstand heavy winds, but a passenger jet would cause more damage than wind, i would say

The towers were designed to whithstand the impact of the largest passenger plane around at the time which would be comprable to a 737.

**fred** · 28-Feb-07, 18:23

Originally Posted by chimo

The programme didnt cherry pick anything, it went over a lot of different aspects and looked at it from different sides.

OK then, where did enough heat come from to melt steel girders?

**fred** · 28-Feb-07, 18:27

Originally Posted by roy

I cannot believe this. Now you are up to it too. The post above is nothing more than trolling. You've contributed nothing to this thread except a pat on Madpicts heid and now you are insulting Fred? Unbelieveable.

Yes roy, that is how the clique works, they gang up and sling insults, you'll find your name appearing on other threads as well as they do their best to discredit you because they have no facts to argue with.

**fred** · 28-Feb-07, 18:34

Originally Posted by Rheghead

I suppose insulting our intelligence is OK then?

Use your inteligence. Look at the facts carefully, don't start with the assumption that the Government of America just wouldn't do a thing like that and then set out to prove it, look at the evidence and see what it is telling you.

**chimo** · 28-Feb-07, 18:35

Originally Posted by fred

OK then, where did enough heat come from to melt steel girders?

The flames from the plane full of fuel crashing into the building. The steel didnt have to melt either; it lost a lot of it's integrity at a far 'cooler' heat than is needed to melt steel, and this caused the girders to buckle and collapse with the weight of the floors above them.

**MadPict** · 28-Feb-07, 18:45

And there is another unfounded allegation, the word "clique", used by a very small minority (the CT Clique?). just because some orgers think the same they are accused of being in the clique!

When they are on the back foot they always pull that word out of their lexicon. There is no clique. Unless it is in your mind....

**MadPict** · 28-Feb-07, 19:47

Why didn't the sprinkler system in WTC 7 extinguish the fires?

The water mains system had been damaged by the collapse of WTC1/2 resulting in the cutting off of the sprinkler system.

"Also, WTC 7 was a very unusual building because it was built over an existing Con-Edison power generation substation, which contained two large 6,000 gallon fuel tanks for the emergency generation of power. The fuel from these tanks could have contributed to the intense heat that apparently weakened the supporting columns in WTC 7."

**j4bberw0ck** · 28-Feb-07, 20:31

Personally, I'd prefer to know why, if the "mass media" were pre-briefed in some way, or had a badly timed conspiracy-ridden release to work from, they didn't fasten on the much bigger story of WHY they were being briefed on something that hadn't happened?

And why, if it duly happened a few minutes later, they didn't run stories on why they'd been pre-briefed on the collapse?

5.5 years seems a long time for clued up journos to spot something that obvious - and the BBC's anti-Bush credentials would have had them crawling over over a story like that in nothing flat.

Just another hoax.

**fred** · 28-Feb-07, 20:41

Originally Posted by chimo

The flames from the plane full of fuel crashing into the building. The steel didnt have to melt either; it lost a lot of it's integrity at a far 'cooler' heat than is needed to melt steel, and this caused the girders to buckle and collapse with the weight of the floors above them.

Aviation fuel doesn't burn hot enough the melt steel and would have burnt off in a few minutes most of it outside the building. If you know some way of melting steel with an ordinary fire let me know and iron foundaries can get rid of their blast furnaces.

The steel may not have needed to melt but it certainly did melt, many tons of it. There is video footage of white hot molten steel pouring out of one of the buildings and they were diging out huge lumps of red hot steel from the rubble weeks later.

**fred** · 28-Feb-07, 20:45

Originally Posted by MadPict

And there is another unfounded allegation, the word "clique", used by a very small minority (the CT Clique?). just because some orgers think the same they are accused of being in the clique!

When they are on the back foot they always pull that word out of their lexicon. There is no clique. Unless it is in your mind....

Once again the evidence proves you wrong, yours and Golachs attempts at intimidation are there for all to see.

**fred** · 28-Feb-07, 20:50

Originally Posted by j4bberw0ck

Personally, I'd prefer to know why, if the "mass media" were pre-briefed in some way, or had a badly timed conspiracy-ridden release to work from, they didn't fasten on the much bigger story of WHY they were being briefed on something that hadn't happened?

I haven't seen anyone saying that that happened.

Looks to me like the BBC were just innocently reporting what they had been told, the reports come in from the news services and the reporter reads them.

**MadPict** · 28-Feb-07, 21:13

Originally Posted by fred

Aviation fuel doesn't burn hot enough the melt steel and would have burnt off in a few minutes most of it outside the building. If you know some way of melting steel with an ordinary fire let me know and iron foundaries can get rid of their blast furnaces.

The steel may not have needed to melt but it certainly did melt, many tons of it. There is video footage of white hot molten steel pouring out of one of the buildings and they were diging out huge lumps of red hot steel from the rubble weeks later.

So what are you saying fred? The steel did melt or it didn't?

**fred** · 28-Feb-07, 21:38

Originally Posted by MadPict

So what are you saying fred? The steel did melt or it didn't?

There is no doubt a lot of steel melted.

I'm asking what caused it to melt, the heat from the aviation fuel and fires in the building were nowhere near hot enough.

**changilass** · 28-Feb-07, 21:43

So what would be hot enough???

**canuck** · 28-Feb-07, 22:16

Wow, a few hours ago I discovered that this thread had been resurrected. I remember when Scorrie threatened to make us read it if we lost the quiz one Sunday months back. Well I broke all land speed records (for me anyway) from Inverness to get to Wick to log on and find out what the fuss was all about.

Hi everyone. I am here in Caithness on your time zone. And it is still not yet dinner time back in Canada.

**fred** · 28-Feb-07, 22:22

Originally Posted by changilass

So what would be hot enough???

A carbon fire with forced oxygen would be hot enough, something blowing air into the fire would make it hot enough like the bellows on a blacksmith's forge make the coal burn hot enough to melt the iron.

Or a non carbon fire, something like thermite which is a mixture of iron oxide and aluminium and burns at a very high temperature, a form of it is used by army demolition teams to cut through steel girders.