World Trade Center: Building 7

I wasn't sure if i should post this in this forum, if not please move it to the proper forum.

I came across this video, not sure who has seen it or not, but it is very interesting, and makes alot of questions pop up in your mind. Hoping that this will bring up a nice discussion.

Here is what was written with this video:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clip from 9/11 Mysteries: The WTC 7 collapse was clearly a case of a well-planned controlled demolition. Are we supposed to believe they were able to wire the building with explosives WHILE IT WAS ON FIRE, and before they had even begun picking through the rubble of tower 1 and 2 for survivors? Didn't they have more important things to be doing that day besides demolishing another building for no reason? Moreover, doesn't it take a full demolition crew at least several weeks to plan a controlled demolition of a 47-floor office building and wire it with the appropriate amount of explosives? It's not something that happens in one afternoon.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is the link to the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DoibU5njEM


There are also other videos of the 9/11 mysteries uploaded by this person, which are also really interesting. OF them i would at least suggest you watch the video at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEJmcvTzYfo



I'm personally still not sure who i believe, but i do have to admit that the way the buildings collapsed did look like they were professionally demolished. What do you think?

The part about the wedge in the center of the building allowing it to colapse on itself is possible. The shock of the first 2 towers could have damage the central porting pilar (not sure this is the exact english terminology, I mean the pilar that are responsible to suport most of the building's weigth) And when I say shock, keep in mind that both ground and air carry vibrations. You don't need a debri.

Anyway, if the central ones were to be damage, it would naturally colapse at the weakest point, so that would explain the wedge in the building.

There is also one thing we have to keep in mind. Explaining an event afterwards with limited data (in the case of the World trade center, mainly limited video evidence) is always hard. Engineering is a complex and vast field. Not all aspects of the sciences involved are always completely understood. We rely on security factors and other mathematical artifacts to compensate from those. But in extreme conditions, an un-compensated factor can have a large effect and lead to un-predictable or hard to explain results.


Aside from that I have to agree that the video raises some interesting questions. Specially the timing of the insirance policy re-negociation and some coments. Apparently there were many coincidence during that day and a rather high occurence of "highly improbable events". Anything is possible but the problem is to proove this with evidence not just conjunctures. I am not sure how that could be done

You should check out some great documentaries of WTC: B7, Pentagon and the WTC themselves about the whole epic story and the collapse which was a mystery.

Movie titles:
1) Loose Change (2nd Edition)
2) The Truth & Lies of 9/11

Website (a great source) and artifact; a site that also back up its information it tell; so that it doesn't make us think otherwise.

1) http://www.apfn.org/apfn/flight77.htm

I can't explain much about the whole story and neither could i say something about it so; watching it would be better.

Don't involve all Engineer's! It's Civil Engineer's fault!! Or the ones who designed the building in the first place (my brain's dried up again... cant remember a term that i've used for the past 3 days...ugh)

I don't really understand things and stuff regarding buildings but there are always cases which we don't understand, bold mentioned one of them and the other one is, maybe the building was designed to colapse like that?? How do you know if it wasn't or was? Do you have the blue-prints of the building and know what/how-much materials they've used? No? Then please do join me in the "Let us find more evidence then blame others" club!

THIS sums it all up pretty much in a nutshell.

This summarize it all...^.^

[MODERATOR'S NOTE: Please don't make small posts in any thread of The Thoughtful Section. This section of the forums is not a place for chat-like conversations as stated in the section rules. It is mean for meaningful and controversial discussions. A better post would have been what points did you agree on? Why do you agree? and so forth. This section is meant to contribute meaningful topics unlike the other sections of the forums.]

I saw the film "Loose Change" the other day and just seeing that film alone makes me believe that 9/11 really could be a conspiracy.
I mean these guys go into deep detail in almost every aspect of 9/11 and prove some very scary, but
true facts.


Here's the link... Loose Change

QUOTE (Lunariz @ Oct 27 2006, 08:32 PM)I saw the film "Loose Change" the other day and just seeing that film alone makes me believe that 9/11 really could be a conspiracy.
I mean these guys go into deep detail in almost every aspect of 9/11 and prove some very scary, but
true facts.


Here's the link... Loose Change
As a note, I used to be very heavy into conspiracy theories in my youth. A natural and often deserved distrust of the government and its motivations contributes to this.

But as a rule, conspiracy theories don't work. It appears that the less evidence there is for one, the more some people will believe in them. And scant evidence combined with misinterpretation of the data can help people bent on distrusting others be even more misled.

I have seen one of the videos that has been referred to in the thread. I listened to some engineers on the other side talk about how things could happen. The fire didn't have to melt the braces -- simply weaken them and make them more elastic. The "puff" seen before the fall was a result of sudden compression at the top. And the building didn't fall like the controlled demolitions do. Controlled demolitions don't start the fall at the top, but are timed to collapse the whole building at once.

Now yes, there are things which are unexplained. But there always will be. Lack of an explanation in even several areas doesn't mean the framework is wrong. Think about it. The Bush Administration planning and executing such a thing in secret? Nine months after taking office? Wow. Or do you want to blame the Clinton Administration for this, too? How could they have wired the place with such high-grade explosives with no one noticing? It would take huge logistical resources. The place was always busy. Questions would have been asked, and alarms would have been raised. You would have to have a veritable army of invisible people willing to kill their own countrymen, including innocent children -- for what? And if the Bush administration couldn't keep their torture camps in Europe under wraps or their connections to Abrahamoff conceiled, then I would say there is no way this could have been done without some of those who laid the explosives coming forward.

Yes, the Bush Administration has lied time and again -- and has always been caught. But the consensus, even including Bin Laden himself, is that this was a well-planned and pretty well executed plot.

But one thing about conspiracy theories. They never die. This one won't. If you prove a contention wrong, it will be replaced immediately afterward by some half-assed explanation couched in technical terms that will certainly sound convincing -- to those who don't know the physics, don't know the math, and don't understand the complexity of what has been asserted -- or who, perhaps out of frustration, are willing to suspend disbelief. A conspiracy theory is like any liar that gets caught -- when one part of the story is disproved, another explanation or cover is made up on the spot. The web of lies is often self-contradictory. And there can't be too many fine details. A wave of the hand and all the little stuff goes away because "it only makes sense."

I'd say this. If the Bush Administration had the incredible skill and precision to execute a massive operation of this size and keep all of its operatives silent on this issue, then I wonder what happened since? The Bush Adminstration has been the most bumbling, inept, and corrupt administration the US has ever had. No way they could have planned this.

Regards,

would you like to see a nice conspiracy??




10/11/06

-Day when private jet flew into a building in newyork city

look at those same numbers upside down now !!

90/11?

Heh. Well, I suppose it would work for some people. I am pretty sure that you are kidding, though!

I had an interesting conversation with a person who didn't believe the moon landing had occurred some months ago (maybe it was up to 2 years. Time flies).

He was arrayed with a huge list of minutia, most of which I was unfamiliar with (and some I suspect was made up on the spot to win the argument). In any case I was unable to convince him that we had made the trip and set foot on the moon. It was a giant coverup involving thousands of people.

Yeah, I believe 911 is a covert operation. When you do the research you come to the conclusion that things do not add up, and there are to many contradictions. If you go to www.infowars.com you can get a time-line account on what happen and when. Now it seems as more and more people are using there own heads and looking at things the way they are then what someone tells you they are. There is a perfect quote from Benjamin Franklin that goes "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither." And when you think about the bills and amendments being passed after 911, like the corrupt Patriot Act and the new Military Commissions Act you will begin to see the objective of the Bush Administration and his lackeys, to scare the people into submission, so that they give up more liberties for security, paving the way towards fascism or maybe totalitarianism. Remember President Bushs word "I am the decider" or about him being a dictator? I will always think "Give me liberty or give me death!!"

Cheers!!
Tim

Well, Bush seems to be all alone nowadays considering the House of Senate + Congress are now controlled by the democrats rather than the republicans.

I really don't think this was a covert operation. An operation like this would've involved a lot of people and somebody somewhere should've noticed something. Also, the result of this possible covert action lead to a war in two separate countries, both of which are rather costly in comparison to the rewards. I might be a little more open to this conspiracy theory, say, if the US decided to maintain control and take the oil in the region at the same time.

Here's an interesting tid-bit for Sep 11 related stuff.

QUOTE (Global Consciousness Project @ Princeton University)This is a report of what we see in the data recorded on September 11, 2001 and the surrounding period. It is the best description we can give of measurements and effects that are essentially mysterious. We do not know how the correlations that arise between electronic random event generators and human concerns come to be, and yet, the results of our analyses over the past three years repeatedly indicate such correlations. We cannot explain the presence of stark patterns in data that should be random, nor do we have any way of divining their ultimate meaning, yet there appears to be an important message here. When we ask why the disaster in New York and Washington and Pennsylvania should appear to be responsible for a strong signal in our world-wide network of instruments designed to generate random noise, there is no obvious answer. When we look carefully and discover that the eggs might reflect our shock and dismay even before our minds and hearts express it, we confront a still deeper mystery. This network, which we designed as a metaphoric EEG for the planet, responded as if it were measuring reactions on a planetary scale. We do not know if there is such a thing as a global consciousness, but if there is, it was moved by the events of September 11, 2001. It appears that the coherence and intensity of our common reaction created a sustained pulse of order in the random flow of numbers from our instruments. These patterns where there should be none look like reflections of our concentrated focus, as the riveting events drew us from our individual concerns and melded us into an extraordinary coherence. Maybe we became, briefly, a global consciousness.

See: http://noosphere.princeton.edu/terror.html

a structural engineer in that first video stated that the cause of the wtc7 collapse was completely different than that of the twin towers. he said that it was the only steel-framed building to be destroyed by fire.

from what i understand, it was fire that caused the collapse of the twin towers. they were designed to take a hit from a plane, and they exceeded that specification. both towers stood after being hit by enormous planes. the towers were also built to withstand fire, with every structural steel member coated with fireproofing. so how did could fire cause it to collapse? well, take ceiling tiles out of an industrial building and they'll have little bits of fireproofing all over them. the stuff doesn't stick that well. hit it with a plane and there won't be a bit of fireproofing left on that steel. the initial fireball didn't do much, but the fire kept burning, heating the steel to the point that it creeped. once the structural members began to buckle, one floor caved in and the rest followed.

first of all, that fire in wtc7 didn't just magically start. something caused it. a burning piece of rubble? if so, that would IMPACT the building. that situation sounds a lot like the one in the towers. impact destroys fireproofing, then the fire destroys the structural steel. even the shockwave from a nearby building falling could easily break the windows in the lower floors, stripping the fireproofing away and exposing structural steel to fire.

building codes for fireproofing have gotten pretty strict since the wtc attacks. a problem with fireproofing that was largely overlooked before is that it needs to cover the steel entirely to be effective. steel transmits heat very well, so a small hole in the fireproofing can cause the entire beam to heat up to the point of creep. if the entire frame of the building is steel, that heat is pretty easy to transfer.

knowing how much fire can weaken steel and how easy it is to strip the fireproofing away, there's no way i can claim with any confidence that wtc7 was intentionally destroyed.

I just cannot see any way that the Bush Administration could have been behind a conspiracy to kill 3000 American citizens by causing the planes to crash into the WTC and prewiring the buildings to cause a collapse.

If there is a word which has characterized the Bush Administration from the getgo, it is "incompetent." With the exception of causing fear and getting the Congress to give money to the rich, there has not been one thing they have done well.

Why, with the election here in the US, if they were the grand conspirators people give them credit for being, they should have been able to guarantee the political fortunes of the Republican Party. They surely could engineer the close races in Virginia and Montana to give the Republicans the control of the Senate.

Conspiracy theories are (in my opinion) a terrible thing. The effect of this kind of obsession on those who hold it is pitiable. I haven't met a single person holding these views that I felt was happy with life and understood the joy of living. They were generally consumed with fears, here, there, or somewhere else. It was as if, with their life out of order and their self esteem damaged by other people viewing them as irrelevant, they had to rebuild their sense of self on an imagination of specialized knowledge and a life perceived as in danger every moment from "the elites."

The surest proof against the conspiracy, though, is that those who are promoting the idea are alive and well, prospering even as they promote it. No government persecution. No silencing. No strange, mysterious accidents. They still live in the land of the free and do what they please. I wish them many long years of making aluminum-foil beanies to ward off the thought-control rays of the federal government, and I sincerely hope they remain single. To inflict such paranoia on a family would be cruel.

However, if having a girlfriend could pull them back into the real world, I'd be all for that. So long as they stay in the real world.

Me? Right now, with the Congress in control of the Democrats (coming January 20), I am pretty happy. George will have a harder time rewarding his buddies and maybe, with Rumsfeld out of the way, we can clean up some of the mess we have allowed to happen.

QUOTE (rtgmath @ Nov 10 2006, 12:39 AM) I just cannot see any way that the Bush Administration could have been behind a conspiracy to kill 3000 American citizens by causing the planes to crash into the WTC and prewiring the buildings to cause a collapse.
I agree there.

There might have been people who decided to let the situation happen because they thougth they would gain by it. That is actually the most efficient and subtle conspiracy.

But you can't involve hundred, if not thousand, of people in a conspiracy and keep it a secret. You need many workers to wire a building. Even if you paid them a lot, you can't garanty that they will never hint any words about it to others.

For instance, some believe that a missile, not a plane, hit the pentagon. How many people are involved to launch a missile? More than two! They are not all involved directly, but at some level (people have to order the stike, load the missile, fire it, replace it, mark that it is out of the inventory, etc. So if it happened, it is certain that at least one person would have noticed and knowed that there was something wrong. And it would have eventually came out.

For the building, it is possible, even if very unlikely. But sometimes, the unlikely will happen. Just anyone who has done even basic engineering! That is the basic principle we have to work with.