WTC7 in Freefall--No Longer Controversial

[Gary]

[/URL]


NIST has reversed its earlier denial of freefall and acknowledged a period of freefall comparable to this analysis in their final report on WTC7 released in November 2008. They did their own measurement with a point near the center of the roof line and came up with an acceleration of 9.81 for approximately 2.25 sec. Their report did not, however, face the consequences of this acknowledgment: that ALL RESISTANCE was instantaneously removed across the width of the building, supporting pre-planted explosives as the cause of the collapse.
-----------------------------------
(Original comment comments follow)
-----------------------------------
Contrary to the August 2008 NIST report on WTC7, the acceleration of Building 7 is measured and is found to be indistinguishable from the acceleration of gravity over a period of about 2.5 seconds of fall.

During the first round of questions in the Aug 26, 2008 NIST Technical Briefing (at 1:01:45 into the presentation) the following question was asked by David Chandler:

"Any number of competent measurements using a variety of methods indicate the northwest corner of WTC 7 fell with an acceleration within a few percent of the acceleration of gravity. Yet your report contradicts this, claiming 40% slower than freefall based on a single data point. How can such a public, visible, easily measurable quantity be set aside?"


Dr. Shyam Sunder replies:

"Could you repeat the question?"

[the question is repeated by the moderator, leaving out the word, "competent" as well as the last sentence]

"Well...um...the...first of all gravity...um...gravity is the loading function that applies to the structure...um...at...um...applies....to every body...every...uh...on...all bodies on...ah...on...um... this particular...on this planet not just...um...uh...in ground zero...um...the...uh...the analysis shows a difference in time between a free fall time, a free fall time would be an object that has no...uh... structural components below it. And if you look at the analysis of the video it shows that the time it takes for the...17...uh...for the roof line of the video to collapse down the 17 floors that you can actually see in the video below which you can't see anything in the video is about...uh... 3.9 seconds. What the analysis shows...and...uh...the structural analysis shows, the collapse analysis shows that same time that it took for the structural model to come down from the roof line all the way for those 17 floors to disappear is...um... 5.4 seconds. It's...uh..., about one point...uh...five seconds or roughly 40% more time for that free fall to happen. And that is not at all unusual because there was structural resistance that was provided in this particular case. And you had...you had a sequence of structural failures that had to take place and everything was not instantaneous."
--------

Note that:
--He acknowledges that freefall can only occur if there is no structure under the falling section of the building.
--He acknowledges that their structural modeling predicts a fall slower than freefall.
--He acknowledges that there was structural resistance in this particular case.
--He acknowledges that there was a sequence of failures that had to take place and that this process was not instantaneous.

Thus, he acknowledges that their model is at variance with the observable fact that freefall actually occurred. Their response is to hold to their model, deny that freefall occurred, and put up a smokescreen of irrelevant measurements that obscure the reality.

[Norval]

Out here in the Pacific North West, we have a saying, , ,
"YOU can TRUST the government, , , , just ask an Indian."

Damn them lying sacks of shit ! ! !
All 3 WTC buildings were IMHO professionally taken down by explosives.

[sfth13]

here's the owner Larry Silverstein saying they "they pulled the building" and then they watched building 7 collapse




here's one of Rumsfeld saying that flight 93 was shot down over PA

[Gale]

Building 7 was the building that held the FEMA offices, correct? Well the FEMA floor was reinforced, had it own power (generating system), it was a fortress. There were no fires going in that building, the minor fires had been put out. There was no reason to take down the FEMA building. That is unless there were other unpublished reasons.
Anyone care to speculate as to why the FEMA building was taken down?

[unipax]

Anyone care to speculate as to why the FEMA building was taken down?



money, for one ie Larry's insurance claim

Also I heard also the Enron investigation data was in there.

But I question why... re all the various supposed info that was in #7 .... why does the collapse / fire (necessarily) end the investigations ?

In other words, I am questioning the critical thinking in a conspiracy theory that says "fire / collapse ends investigation". I would say that investigations could continue anyway.

Dont get me wrong, I say 9/11 is inside job.

So of course, the collapse of #7 could hinder an investigation, but not kill an investigation.

But of course the crooks in control would welcome the 'end of investigation' .

[unipax]

To elaborate .....

Re the FEMA building and reinforced FEMA floor ....

If they wanted to hide anything, they could have removed paper files before 9/11 and deleted electronic files anytime. They had all the time they needed beforehand.

They could have removed hard drives before hand at their leisure. They could have removed any and all incriminating data at their leisure.

This is why I question claims that #7 was demolished to destroy evidence. Why risk failure of evidence destruction in a fire / collapse when you can just shred / delete the evidence ?

Sure, they could have made sure that every bit of evidence about Enron, and fema camps was wrapped in explosives, but it would be easier and more certain to just remove / shred / delete that stuff.

Therefore I think #7 was moreso about insurance money.

I could be wrong.

[sfth13]

maybe they did remove it, delete it and shread it. but then there would be an investidation as to who did it..so the demo was just the icing on the cake. all they had to say was all the evidence was inside so when they searched the rubble there was no eveidence to be found. blame it on the fire and the collaspe. i'm sure it had a little to do with both..

[Gale]

But insurance money just doesn't cut it for me.

[sfth13]

I had a youtube vidoe i'm trying to find. it tied together the warsi n afganistan and Irag along with the over 2 trillion missing from the DOD budget.I think the insurance angel would have been a scapegoat if needed.

[unipax]

maybe they did remove it, delete it and shread it. but then there would be an investidation as to who did it..so the demo was just the icing on the cake. all they had to say was all the evidence was inside so when they searched the rubble there was no eveidence to be found. blame it on the fire and the collaspe. i'm sure it had a little to do with both..

yeah
that works
.................................................. ......

[Terran]

[WTC 7] contained offices of the FBI, Department of Defense, IRS (which contained prodigious amounts of corporate tax fraud, including Enron’s), US Secret Service, Securities & Exchange Commission (with more stock fraud records), and Citibank’s Salomon Smith Barney, the Mayor’s Office of Emergency Management and many other financial institutions. [Online Journal]
The SEC has not quantified the number of active cases in which substantial files were destroyed [by the collapse of WTC 7]. Reuters news service and the Los Angeles Times published reports estimating them at 3,000 to 4,000. They include the agency's major inquiry into the manner in which investment banks divvied up hot shares of initial public offerings during the high-tech boom. ..."Ongoing investigations at the New York SEC will be dramatically affected because so much of their work is paper-intensive," said Max Berger of New York's Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann. "This is a disaster for these cases." [New York Lawyer



Citigroup says some information that the committee is seeking [about WorldCom] was destroyed in the Sept. 11 terror attack on the World Trade Center. Salomon had offices in 7 World Trade Center, one of the buildings that collapsed in the aftermath of the attack. The bank says that back-up tapes of corporate emails from September 1998 through December 2000 were stored at the building and destroyed in the attack. [TheStreet]
Inside [WTC 7 was] the US Secret Service's largest field office with more than 200 employees. ..."All the evidence that we stored at 7 World Trade, in all our cases, went down with the building," according to US Secret Service Special Agent David Curran. [TechTV]

The collapse of WTC 7 also profited Silverstein Properties to the tune of ~$500 million through insurance payments.

Source: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/cutter.html

[sfth13]

yes... thanks Terran. I knew there was a lot of evidence/ files kept there.. but I forgot which ones..I couldn't find the youtube I was looking for. it's been removed. go figure.:bananen_smilies046:

[unipax]

OK I retract what I said
destruction of investigations sure is a good possibility
even if it didnt all burn up, they can say it did, of course, as sfth said

[Gary]

Well guy's, the question being asked all over the net at the moment is why didn't this building collapse?
Building 7 collapse is a REEEAAAAAAL joke if you watch this! IMHO.