Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis
Jeffrey Orling Wrote:I said that a twin tower floor could support perhaps an additional one or two floors applied as a static load. I think as a dynmic load the applied forced could be 10x or more than a static load and so this may be able to fracture the floor this came down on and kick off the ROOSD process or prgressive unstopppable floor collapse.

Albert's point is that the move of the antenna strongly suggests that the entire core area may have come undone and the ALL the floors bove 98 were free and falling... inside the facade and the 12 story facade was pulled downward by those 12 floors as rhey came free from the core and were plunging down. Unfortunately we can see inside past the facade and have to use the movements telegraphed through it and to it. There defintely was subtle movement of the top which suggests the frame was under extreme stress and experiencing individual and aggregate column strength loss before the visible release and downward motion of the facade and the flash over and expulsion of material.

A dynamic load amplification of 10X requires a significant stiffness to be involved and it is not automatic.

The entire core did come down inside and it pulled the perimeter inward causing the entire upper section to come down. The problem is how the entire 12 story core upper section came down, not whether it did or not. Albert's logic is circular and his thinking that the 360 ton antenna somehow caused the fall of the core is ridiculous on its face as the core columns at the 98th floor were capable as a unit of handling 55,000 tons. There was also little damage to the 98th floor.

Finally, none of the columns were involved in the resistance to the collapse as measurements and calculations show. This is extraordinarily difficult to assign a natural collapse theory to and is the basis of the need for something more being involved to have caused the collapse, such as demolition devices. The claim that no sounds or flashes were heard or seen is bogus. There are plenty of firemen on record as saying they saw and heard flashes and explosions.


Messages In This Thread
Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis - by Tony Szamboti - 11-08-2013, 04:16 PM

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  WTC-7 Before Collapse - Video of activities inside and outside Peter Lemkin 0 5,821 04-12-2015, 09:45 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  New Detailed Analysis of WTC 7 Controlled Demolition Peter Lemkin 0 6,254 01-12-2015, 04:42 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  The case against the NIST WTC 7 collapse initiation analysis Tony Szamboti 5 5,736 29-11-2013, 04:31 AM
Last Post: Jeffrey Orling
  New Analysis Summary Of 9-11-01 Insider Trading [with some very interesting facts, if true]! Peter Lemkin 4 7,145 28-10-2013, 03:01 PM
Last Post: David Guyatt
  Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis: Redux Lauren Johnson 0 4,516 16-08-2013, 03:39 AM
Last Post: Lauren Johnson
  New Seismic Analysis Further Points to Controlled Demolition.... Peter Lemkin 0 4,436 03-12-2012, 05:21 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  911 Meta Analysis Jeffrey Orling 18 14,903 23-10-2012, 08:54 PM
Last Post: Albert Doyle
  STill the best and most comprehensive timeline and information source for 911-related events Peter Lemkin 0 3,418 10-08-2012, 08:10 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  New theory explains collapse of Twin Towers- Aluminium and water explosions Magda Hassan 7 12,307 27-09-2011, 05:47 PM
Last Post: Jeffrey Orling
  First Wikileaks Cable possibly related to 911, Al Quaeda, etc. Peter Lemkin 0 7,453 26-09-2011, 08:02 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)