When I asked my wife what she thought about building 7, her first reaction was, "well, didn't they have to bring it down because it was damaged beyond repair?" I said, "what do you mean bring it down?" she answered, "well yeah, my friend who worked in the building told me the building was pretty damaged so they just demolished it" ... So then I tell her that the official version was that it was probably due to a fire, and she says "oh... really?" I think that a lot of people believe that the wtc 7 building was demolished intentionally because it was damaged, but that does not seem to the official reason.
as long as the people remain idots like in this video.... we are in trouble: <object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/HCkYfYa8ePI"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/HCkYfYa8ePI" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object> as i watched it i go, "hmmmmm.. ok.. that one is hiroshi, that one is oldturdtrader, and this one is nikki... and etc... none for the record were stupid enough to be vermin77 though.
welcome back to this thread mav, yeah there are also some videos depicting police and rescue workers saying the bdg was gonna blow up. no public there to warn, so obviously the extremely weak hypothesis from the govt suckers that it was a lie told to move people doesn't really stand up. here are the links: this blog is one of the best i found, very well written and full of quality content: http://killtown.blogspot.com/2006/10/gz-rescuer-wtc-7-about-to-blow.html the link doesn't seem to work, altough i treble checked and i am sure it is correct. if u type on the search box 'wtc7 killtown' u'll get directed to the correct link: click the second link named "gz rescuer: wtc about to blow up".
how could it be the official reason, there aint no chance a massive 47 storey bdg could be wired in a few hours in the middle of one of the most cahotic event in the history of america. that's why the mentioning of wtc7 is avoided like fire, it is the achille heels in the whole govt original conspiracy theory.
sorry, i forgot to post the link to the blog: type 'wtc7 killtown' on the search box in the upper left corner, then click 'search this blog': http://killtown.blogspot.com
wtc has clearly been pulled, there just aint no way around that. stealing charlie sheen words.... "if u dont believe that wtc has been purposely demolished u either had your chair not facing the tv when the collapse was shown or u need serious psychiatric evaluation."
But this is silly. You can't consider this one quote in isolation from everything else in the report. You're free to call what I say interpretation, but it is reasonable interpretation, given a great deal of other information that is present. Of course, you are also using `just an interpretation' of what is written in this quotation to assert that the report is deceptive. This is a 292 page long text that we're discussing. Looking at a single quote and reading it in isolation from all of the other evidence is not very sensible, IMO. There is in fact a great deal of evidence in the report to suggest that gases were free to move vertically in the core spaces, especially on the impact damaged floors. For a start, even with the towers completely undamaged it is quite clear that there are structures present within the cores which run vertically between floors and which allow for gases to be transmitted both upwards and downwards. These include, among others: elevator shafts and stairwells. See for example, the plan of the 96th floor (Figure 1-5, page 9, final NIST report). I don't know whether you recall this or not, but I do: around the time of the attacks it was widely reported on the news that people in the lobby of WTC 1, far below the impact zone, had suffered severe flash burns from the initial fireball that was created on the impact of the airliner. Flames and overpressures from these enormous fireballs were certainly transmitted downwards across many floors, through the elevator shafts. From the NIST final report we read: (page 24, final NIST report, emphasis added) This alone is enough to show that gases could be transported vertically between floors in the core of the building. By way of contrast, such vertical gas transfer is, clearly far more difficult within the tenant spaces, owing to the presence of the heavy concrete floor slabs between each successive floor space. Due to their large mass, the floor slabs were not, in general, completely destroyed by the impact of the airliners. (See figure 6-20, page 112, final report) To see some of the vertical paths that might have existed in the damaged core on the impact levels, one can simply take a look at the elevation diagrams of the towers (Figure 1-10, page 16), showing the three stairwells in WTC1 -- all of which were completely cut at the level of the impact floors. We can certainly expect that some of the elevator shafts were cut too, since these reside immediately behind the stairwells, and in the path of the oncoming airliner, on floors near the impact level. The simulations of the impact damage in the report strongly suggest that this was the case. (See figures 6-18 (page 111) and 6-21 (page 113) and, of course, compare with the plan of the 96th floor.) So I believe that it is not interpretation on my part that many open vertical pathways existed between the floors, in the core of the building, near the level of impact. And it is not interpretation on my part that hot gases rise, when a path is available for them to do so. More to come ...
I agree that it is unclear from this quotation alone exactly what temperature is supposed to have existed, in the simulations, in the core upper air layer. But I think that the graphics clarify this somewhat. I didn't look carefully enough at them last night, sorry, and I will have more to say about it. What I said about the graphics is somewhat mistaken, I think.
Have you looked at the graphic of the 97th floor and compared it with the graphic of the 94th floor, that you posted, as yet? Nevermind for the moment what you or I think it is that the quote says. Let's just try to clarify this one issue of what can be deduced from the graphics about the simulated temperatures in the upper layer air of the core, on levels 94 and 97. First let's consider the graphic of temperatures on the 94th floor, fifteen minutes after impact. It is figure 6-36 on page 127 of the final NIST report. Looking as carefully as I can, I count on this graphic at least 13 core columns within the region where upper layer air temperatures are between 800-900 C (yellow-yellow orange). These columns are mostly on the right hand side of the core on the diagram, though there is one on the upper left hand side. This is not in agreement with what you said above, that temperatures in the core never reached above 300 C. Do you agree? The graphic of the 97th floor temperatures that I am referring to is the lower left panel in Figure 6-37 on page 128 of the final report. Unfortunately it is harder to see, since it is projected at an angle in a 3-d representation. I can't reliably count the number of core columns that are exposed to high temperature so easily on this graphic. It is apparent though, that some, not insignificant, areas in the center and left corner of the core have upper layer temperatures ranging from 800-1000 C (yellow to yellow orange). It also is apparent that most of the area of the core is at temperatures above 500 C on this graphic (green areas), and that, in fact, only the lower right corner of the core is at temperatures below 300 C (light blue regions). Do you agree?