Heatmiser, I didn't take it personally, my entire family are ironworkers and so are most of the community members.
Let me say, we 'erect' buildings NOT demolish them! Yes, I would like to learn how buildings are demolished. Its' an 'art' within itself. To make building crumble along side other buildings is awesome to behold.
In one of my post I said, the 'manner' in which the buildings came down didn't seem right to me. First of all, I didn't think it would collapse. When it did, I was puzzled, any ways, this thought stay on my mental shelf.
Let me share an experience. I'm no electrician but here's what happend of few years ago. I was having computer problems and I wanted to check the wiring in my house. I called the electrician, when they arrived, I said, are you get to check the main box first, the boss said NO. I took him to where the problem was and for ONE hour they couldn't find the problem. I 'again' asked, do you want to check the fuse box. So, the two electricians went to the basement and began to check the box. Lo and behold, there was the problem, a screw had been burnt and it was causing a shortage! Now, had they check the box in the first place, the problem would have been solved. These are experienced electricians! As I said, I'm no electrician but why did I suggest they check the box first? Do you get my drift?
You may want to view the following site.
http://www.serendipity.li/wtc5.htm I'm not asking you to believe it, just view it.
You have every right to your opinion and I'm not making any issues about it. Experience has taught me that things change.
About welding, yes I'm also a welder but NOT a ship welder. I do remember a JW ship welder. He worked in the Quincy ship yard. WE exchanged many experiences. Yes, the trick to good welding is the 'proper' heat. As to applying continuous heat to a building, wasn't there a building somewhere a few years that was on fire for over 24 hours and it remained standing, it never collapsed? As to the WTC, many questions are still unanswered. This reminds me of the Warren Commission report as to who killed Kennedy. That report didn't take long to draw up and it still sticks in my mind. With the volumes of material, they said, Oswald was the lone shooter! If so, why the many volumes? One of the best ways to fool people is throw in all kinds of bull-crap and boring material to discourage them from investigating the tragedy. Let me say, I had a brother that was a con-artist, he was also a professional boxer, so you had a choice, either you believed him or fight it out. The majority preferred to let it slide.
Oh, on a side note, how is it that they found 2 passports of these terrorists who crashed into the WTC on the street? Hmmmmmm, fireproof passports?
Thanks for your comments & opinion.
Golf
The Proof!!!!: The Use of Explosives on 911 at the World Trade Center Compl
by Ianone 121 Replies latest jw friends
-
Golf
-
Golf
Heatmiser, about erecting a steel structure without bolts I only did it once. It was in Quincy Mass. a Campbell plant. When I tell this story to fellow ironworkers they can't believe it because they never saw it done, its NOT the norm.
Anyways, here it is. The main headers which receive the intermediate beams have 'clips.' The intermediate beams have steel 'tongues.' This steel tongue is inserted into the female clip and we have to use a heavy sledge hammer to force it in. These intermediate beams were beveled because they were to be welded.
If you think of this in sexual terms its easy to figure out, ha ha.
Golf. -
El blanko
Well, I found the video interesting and I tend to believe the evidence presented.
I also think (know) the US has scum at the top end.
It is important to present this information to a wider audience who for the most part are living in slumber land. When you wake up, you have a chance to say no to these powers and refuse to be coerced into schemes set to take away your rights as an idividual.
-
Heatmiser
Scientific teams simulated the fires from jet fuel at WTC, using similar steel in the WTC, and concluded that the steel did not melt at the tempertures speculated to have reached before the collapse. Let me get the article.
Steel doesn't have to melt to lose structural integrity. All It takes is HEAT. I have seen steel plates warp and sag under there own weight from fires so take it as you will.
wasn't there a building somewhere a few years that was on fire for over 24 hours and it remained standing, it never collapsed?
Yes and I am sure Ianone will be happy to post the pic for you. BUT that building didn't have a passenger airliner hit it either, plus it was a traditionaly constructed building not trusses. Comparing apples and oranges.
As I have stated before, the building probably wouldn't have collapsed from just the AC damage and it would have difinatly not collapsed in just a fire. It was the COMBINATION of structural damage and fire. The damage done by the AC also damaged the fire proofing on the structural steel in the areas of the impact so the heat from the fires weakend the steel enough in those areas past the point it could not hold the load anymore.
Here is a question for you Ianone. Why do they put fire proofing material on steel? The steel isn't flammable, so why do they do it?
-
Heatmiser
The main headers which receive the intermediate beams have 'clips.' The intermediate beams have steel 'tongues.' This steel tongue is inserted into the female clip and we have to use a heavy sledge hammer to force it in. These intermediate beams were beveled because they were to be welded.
Sounds pretty interesting. Did they ever tell you guys why they used that method instead of a traditional joint? I get a mental picture of a "dove tail" type joint.
-
Golf
Heatmiser, a dove tail will do. Yes, it was an interesting job. I reminded my partner about it this morning at the coffee shop. As I said, the local ironworkers couldn't believe we connected steel without bolts. I worked on the IBM structure which
At the coffee shop I also brought up the WTC building. Two ironworkers who work mostly in NY city said the structure was designed to collapse 'within' not outwardly. One of them brought up another incident involving a plane hitting the Empire State building.
Like I said, we erect steel buildings not demolish them. With all that hot heat that affect the entire building, why were there survivors? For that same heat to affect other floors it would have to affect the people in the staircases.
Like I said, its the 'manner' that these buildings came down that still troubles me. Its not a close case for me. Also, finding two foreign passports on the street while the owners died in the flaming crash is some magic!
Golf -
Heatmiser
With all that hot heat that affect the entire building, why were there survivors? For that same heat to affect other floors it would have to affect the people in the staircases.
The stuctural failure started in the damaged sections. That is why in the videos you see them coming down from the damaged areas and above at first. Then the floors below started failing in a "domino" or cascading effect from all of the collapsed sections weight that far exceded the design limits of the undamaged sections. As each new floor collapsed it just added expodentialy the forces on each floor under it.
-
Nancy Drake
Hey guys here is an interesting shockwave flash my bf sent me about a Pentagon conspiracy as well..
http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon.php#Main
-
Golf
Heatmiser, one of the things I've learned about life is. "Make time your friend." They say, 'good things come to those who wait' I'm not in a hurry for an absolute answer. How many years did it the Church to recognize that the earth revolves around the sun?
Golf -
Quotes
"Never attribute to conspiracy that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
So let me see if I get this straight:
* we all agree (I think) that a fuel loaded jet crashed into each tower
* we agree that these were indeed jet planes filled with innocent passengers (I'm assuming that we both believe that the grieving families are not inventing dead husbands, wives, etc.)
* we agree that the jets' impact likely caused serious structural damage to the building simply by the impact (the recreations I have seem amaze me that the building didn't collapse immediately. I guess this explains why engineering design uses something called "Safety Factor" which means simply "make everything much bigger strong than is necessary so if something fails, the remaining can share the load without catastrophic failure)
* we agree there was a massive fire (I seem to remember watching in awe the size of the fire and the massive black smoke clouds on the morning of Sept. 11) for quite some time (and hour? more? less? can't recall exactly how long)
* it is claimed that the jets' impact likely damaged the "services spine" in the middle of the building, thereby destroying the water supply to the fire suppression system at (and above? the loss of water pressure probably make the entire water system not work at all) the point of impact (do we agree on this? I don't know)
* it is known that the structural members in WTC were *NOT* insulated with asbestos (I can provide proof of this is you want it -- asbestos was newly banned at the time of WTC construction) but they used instead a different, new-at-the-time sprayed-on fire insulation which is now known to be less effective than asbestos and less resistant to mechanical damage (i.e. more easily scrapped off when impacted by jets 'n stuff). Even if you don't agree with this point, it doesn't matter; the use of asbestos would have only reduced (but not eliminated) the rate of heat transfer to the structural members. No insulation is perfect.
* it is generally known (I hope we can all agree on this) by anyone who has ever watched a blacksmith working that heated metals become "weaker", ie. they are more easily malleable
* it is known that particles in a potential gradient will follow the path of steepest gradient: in simple terms, things fall *DOWN* not sideways.
* the previous point doesn't prevent a random collision of debris causing a "cone" of debris which, at the base of the collapsed building, could impact on 7 WTC (in other words, some stuff did fall on 7)
--> but somehow all of the above is NOT enough to explain the catastrophic failure of the buildings? Somehow, for some reasone, we have to add (as one poster already mentioned) miles of DET cord, tons of explosives, in three busy downtown office buildings, and a massive conspiracy involving people from all professions and all walks of life?
But don't listent to me. After all, I could be a shill for the NWO. All of us engineers are! :-)
~Quotes, of the "keeping it simple" class