Quote:
Originally Posted by MediaGuy
I read those. I don't blather about fire. No one blathers about WTC7 - what caused it to come down straight and purfect.
Neither commission reports or NIST or FEMA talk about the collapse. They talk about what "lead" to it.
If there was such damage on the south face, why did it not fall backwards. Have you seen the footage? It's near one of the most perfect demolitions recorded. Ever.
Every truss, beam and girder would have to fail absolutely and simultaneously for it to go down the way it did. No one addresses this.
Actual physical damage leading to collapse would have lead to toppling determined by the measure of the damage. That didn't happen. It went down like a house of cards, with nothing but air inside apparently.
|
OK, so even though the links I posted provide a pile of obvious evidence as to what brought building 7 down from hundreds of leading experts, you refuse to buy it because of how it fell like a controlled demolition. Hmm, guess after reading this you are all out of reasons to hang onto your true believer beliefs:
from structure magazine -
this sequence of events, with roof elements sinking into a building with an intact facade, suggests an interior failure. An interior failure would explain the appearance of a controlled collapse with a relatively small debris field, as seen with WTC7. - from
http://www.structuremag.org/Archives...sanz-Nov07.pdf