The 9/11 Forum

Intelligent and evidence-based discussion of 9/11 issues

Skip to content

v
Welcome
Welcome!

Our vision is to provide a home to sincere 9/11 researchers free from biased moderation and abusive tirades from other members.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which only gives you access to view the discussions. Feel free to register to request membership. By joining our free community, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. All potential members will be subject to an interview via email and only sincere and responsible researchers will be approved. See the forum guidelines for more information.

Withering critique of the new WTC7 report

Analysis of fire and collapse theories and examination of related evidence.

Re: Withering critique of the new WTC7 report

Postby OneWhiteEye on Fri Nov 21, 2008 7:07 pm

It does pay to hold the nose and go over there, every once in a while. They're like news-readers. A quote from NIST:

NIST wrote:In Stage 2, the north face descended at gravitational acceleration, as the buckled columns provided negligible support to the upper portion of the north face. This free fall drop continued for approximately 8 stories or 32.0 m (105 ft), the distance traveled between times t = 1.75 s and t = 4.0 s.


Why do I waste my time splitting hairs? NIST says the NW corner fell at freefall and this should be expected.

Of course, their sim shows the building wrinkling up like a crushed beer can, the NW corner drooping down slowly over a period of seconds due to the folding of previously vertical surfaces. There's no need to reconcile the two, is there?
OneWhiteEye
 
Posts: 1014
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 9:40 pm

Previous



Return to WTC7

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests