One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
CIA Agent Confesses On Deathbed: "We Blew Up WTC7 On 9/11" #3
This discussion was started in a previous topic. You can find it here.
Page <<first <prev 49 of 69 next> last>>
Nov 24, 2017 14:34:35   #
payne1000
 
Blade_Runner wrote:
This is not a science lesson per se, it is simple engineering logic.

Individual floors bear their own weight plus whatever live load they are designed to bear, holding up the weight of the building is the job of the vertical support columns.
IOW, the vertical columns held up the individual floors, individually.
IOW, in the twin towers, floor number 10, for example, did not support the weight of floors 11 through 110.
IOW, in the South Tower, for example, when the vertical support failed at the 80th floor, the combined weight of floors 80 through 110 collapsed onto floor number 79. Then, a second or so later, the combined weight of floors 80 through 110 PLUS the weight of what remained of floor 79 collapsed onto floor number 78. And so on all the way down. One floor at a time.

The combined weight of floors 80 through 110 included the weight of 30 office floors plus the live loads each individual floor supported, the weight of all perimeter columns from the 80th to the 110th floor, and the weight of the core support columns from the 80th to the 110th floors, 30 core floors plus the live loads each individual core floor supported.
This is not a science lesson per se, it is simple ... (show quote)


You claim: "in the twin towers, floor number 10, for example, did not support the weight of floors 11 through 110."
That is absurd. Every floor in all three towers which came down on 9/11 supported all the floors above them.
All office towers are constructed to be one strong self-supported structure . . . not a stack of individual floors.
Do you even realize how ignorant what you're claiming is?

Reply
Nov 24, 2017 14:47:59   #
payne1000
 
Blade_Runner wrote:
You fail to provide evidence that the photo was faked.


You provided the evidence that the photo was faked when you posted these photos.

In the first photo count down from the two floors toward the top of the image which have dark smoke marks to where the damage begins.
I count ten floors. Now count down 10 floors on the second image and note the damage is not there. The damage retouched into the first image is three windows deep on the sunlit side. The second photo does not show this damage.

Another interesting feature to note . . . the top image does not show smoke pouring out of the 10th window down or the smoke 3 windows down from that as the second photo does.
That means the fires were going out . . . or . . . they removed the smoke in order to retouch in the fake damage.





Reply
Nov 24, 2017 16:46:13   #
Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON
 
payne1000 wrote:
You claim: "in the twin towers, floor number 10, for example, did not support the weight of floors 11 through 110."
That is absurd. Every floor in all three towers which came down on 9/11 supported all the floors above them.
All office towers are constructed to be one strong self-supported structure . . . not a stack of individual floors.
Do you even realize how ignorant what you're claiming is?
OK, genius, all along you've been telling us you are some sort of architectural expert, a wizard of civil engineering, so how could you possibly have gotten this so wrong?

Explain exactly how an individual floor which is connected only to the vertical columns supports any floor above it.

Reply
 
 
Nov 24, 2017 17:07:14   #
emarine
 
payne1000 wrote:
You claim: "in the twin towers, floor number 10, for example, did not support the weight of floors 11 through 110."
That is absurd. Every floor in all three towers which came down on 9/11 supported all the floors above them.
All office towers are constructed to be one strong self-supported structure . . . not a stack of individual floors.
Do you even realize how ignorant what you're claiming is?



The vertical columns in the core & outer frame supported all the floors individually by weld on supports... each individual floor had a weight limit of 1300Tons due to these weld on supports... the weld on supports failed from a massive overload on 911 not silent high explosives... the fact that you can't comprehend this is amazing...by the way your stupid brick experiment doesn't even have any floors to prove anything... But all this should not really surprise me from someone who stated that the sheetrock should have stopped the collapse to begin with... you prove there is no limit to ignorance ... a framed tube structure is in fact a stack of individual floors supported by inner & outer massive vertical columns...

Reply
Nov 24, 2017 17:22:09   #
payne1000
 
Blade_Runner wrote:
OK, genius, all along you've been telling us you are some sort of architectural expert, a wizard of civil engineering, so how could you possibly have gotten this so wrong?

Explain exactly how an individual floor which is connected only to the vertical columns supports any floor above it.


If you're talking about the floor slabs independently, why don't you say floor slab? Of course the vertical columns hold up the floor slabs. The floor slabs cannot fall independently of the rest of the tower and they cannot cause a tower to collapse. Each of the towers had more than 9,000 steel floor trusses which connected the outer wall columns to the inner core columns. Each floor slab on the towers was in the shape of a square donut. Interior walls on many of the floors added more support to the floor slabs. There is no way the floor slabs could fall independently but it is the only way you cover-up shills can falsely explain collapse without explosives being involved.



Reply
Nov 24, 2017 17:27:54   #
payne1000
 
emarine wrote:
The vertical columns in the core & outer frame supported all the floors individually by weld on supports... each individual floor had a weight limit of 1300Tons due to these weld on supports... the weld on supports failed from a massive overload on 911 not silent high explosives... the fact that you can't comprehend this is amazing...by the way your stupid brick experiment doesn't even have any floors to prove anything... But all this should not really surprise me from someone who stated that the sheetrock should have stopped the collapse to begin with... you prove there is no limit to ignorance ... a framed tube structure is in fact a stack of individual floors supported by inner & outer massive vertical columns...
The vertical columns in the core & outer frame... (show quote)


If my brick experiment had 110 floors and 9,000 floor trusses along with 287 vertical columns, you could bounce a Buick off it.

You still haven't explained how the falling floor slabs could take down the massive steel center core.
Your ridiculous theory has never been able to explain that.

Reply
Nov 24, 2017 17:28:21   #
Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON
 
emarine wrote:
The vertical columns in the core & outer frame supported all the floors individually by weld on supports... each individual floor had a weight limit of 1300Tons due to these weld on supports... the weld on supports failed from a massive overload on 911 not silent high explosives... the fact that you can't comprehend this is amazing...by the way your stupid brick experiment doesn't even have any floors to prove anything... But all this should not really surprise me from someone who stated that the sheetrock should have stopped the collapse to begin with... you prove there is no limit to ignorance ... a framed tube structure is in fact a stack of individual floors supported by inner & outer massive vertical columns...
The vertical columns in the core & outer frame... (show quote)
We're wasting our time, E. payne is locked into the conspiracy theories tighter than the rebar in Hoover Dam.

The mere suggestion that an individual floor in the WTC towers (or any building for that matter) plays any role whatsoever in supporting any floor or floors above it is a total disconnect from the physics of civil engineering.

Reply
 
 
Nov 24, 2017 17:33:51   #
Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON
 
payne1000 wrote:
If you're talking about the floor slabs independently, why don't you say floor slab? Of course the vertical columns hold up the floor slabs. The floor slabs cannot fall independently of the rest of the tower and they cannot cause a tower to collapse. Each of the towers had more than 9,000 steel floor trusses which connected the outer wall columns to the inner core columns. Each floor slab on the towers was in the shape of a square donut. Interior walls on many of the floors added more support to the floor slabs. There is no way the floor slabs could fall independently but it is the only way you cover-up shills can falsely explain collapse without explosives being involved.
If you're talking about the floor slabs independen... (show quote)
Explain exactly how an individual floor which is connected only to the vertical columns supports any floor above it.

Reply
Nov 24, 2017 17:52:59   #
payne1000
 
Blade_Runner wrote:
Explain exactly how an individual floor which is connected only to the vertical columns supports any floor above it.


Why don't you explain how an individual floor (slab) could collapse when that would require over 300 connections of the floor trusses to the vertical columns to fail at the same time?

Reply
Nov 24, 2017 17:57:46   #
payne1000
 
Blade_Runner wrote:
We're wasting our time, E. payne is locked into the conspiracy theories tighter than the rebar in Hoover Dam.

The mere suggestion that an individual floor in the WTC towers (or any building for that matter) plays any role whatsoever in supporting any floor or floors above it is a total disconnect from the physics of civil engineering.


You were the one who referred to floors instead of floor slabs. A floor of a building includes the walls as well as the floor. Since you have no valid theory to replace what really happened, all you can do is attempt to confuse the issue.

You haven't explained why you posted that photo of WTC7 which was retouched to show faked damage.

Reply
Nov 24, 2017 18:25:39   #
emarine
 
payne1000 wrote:
If my brick experiment had 110 floors and 9,000 floor trusses along with 287 vertical columns, you could bounce a Buick off it.

You still haven't explained how the falling floor slabs could take down the massive steel center core.
Your ridiculous theory has never been able to explain that.




You missed the point again... your dumb brick would bounce off with or without the individual floors... the vertical columns failed after the floor supports that support the floors failed... that's why they are called floor supports ...the vertical columns fell outward only after the floor support connections failed allowing the inner & outer frame structure to separate... the floor system held the core & outer framing together as one strong unit...no floors no support...everything was designed to work together as a unit...ever wonder why the towers went up 3 floors @ a time & not 30?...++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Reply
 
 
Nov 24, 2017 18:45:19   #
emarine
 
payne1000 wrote:
Why don't you explain how an individual floor (slab) could collapse when that would require over 300 connections of the floor trusses to the vertical columns to fail at the same time?




because they were designed to support 1300Tons each not 90000Tons each... you can't use how much weight the vertical columns support that's not what failed...

Reply
Nov 24, 2017 19:09:21   #
emarine
 
payne1000 wrote:
You were the one who referred to floors instead of floor slabs. A floor of a building includes the walls as well as the floor. Since you have no valid theory to replace what really happened, all you can do is attempt to confuse the issue.

You haven't explained why you posted that photo of WTC7 which was retouched to show faked damage.



No the floor is the floor & the walls are the walls...you have no valid intelligence... a common ladder has 2 vertical supports & steps or rungs... remove the rungs on a 1400ft tall ladder & see what happens...

Reply
Nov 24, 2017 19:48:13   #
Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON
 
payne1000 wrote:
You were the one who referred to floors instead of floor slabs. A floor of a building includes the walls as well as the floor. Since you have no valid theory to replace what really happened, all you can do is attempt to confuse the issue.

You haven't explained why you posted that photo of WTC7 which was retouched to show faked damage.
Hey, payne, hello, anybody home? A floor DOES NOT include the walls, where you got that idea is anyone's guess.

When I refer to the WTC tower floors, I mean the floors, which includes the slabs and the trusses. Forget the psychobabble about independent floors and hinged truss connections and straws and brick experiments, just explain how an individual WTC tower floor provided any support for a floor or floors above it..

In response to your second comment, I'll tell you why I posted the photo of WTC7 if you first show proof that the photo was faked. It is a fact that a large section of the North Tower perimeter wall tore a deep gash across 18 lower floors along the SW corner of WTC 7. This debris was hot enough to set fires in the lower floors of WTC7 which progressed upward through the building. So, if you are going to claim the photo was faked, you need to prove it, and to give any credibility to your claim, we'll need the name or names of those who faked it.

Reply
Nov 24, 2017 20:06:07   #
emarine
 
Blade_Runner wrote:
Hey, payne, hello, anybody home? A floor DOES NOT include the walls, where you got that idea is anyone's guess.

When I refer to the WTC tower floors, I mean the floors, which includes the slabs and the trusses. Forget the psychobabble about independent floors and hinged truss connections and straws and brick experiments, just explain how an individual WTC tower floor provided any support for a floor or floors above it..

In response to your second comment, I'll tell you why I posted the photo of WTC7 if you first show proof that the photo was faked. It is a fact that a large section of the North Tower perimeter wall tore a deep gash across 18 lower floors along the SW corner of WTC 7. This debris was hot enough to set fires in the lower floors of WTC7 which progressed upward through the building. So, if you are going to claim the photo was faked, you need to prove it, and to give any credibility to your claim, we'll need the name or names of those who faked it.
Hey, payne, hello, anybody home? A floor DOES NOT ... (show quote)




The only real issue with payne may be his name... because everything else is pure ignorance & total bullshit...

Reply
Page <<first <prev 49 of 69 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.