Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis

[Jan Klimkowski]

The hypothesis should be correlated with the actual conditions of the collapse. If a full floor of core columns were magically removed the inner floor pad would drop pulling the fastened connections with the outer frame inward ripping the outer frame supports inward and out of line with those below them. The correct formula here, that is more in line with the actual event, is the entire section above would then become a downward pile driver initiating the floor pad collapse. This is probably very close to what actually happened. This would be aided by a damaged core and frame steel weakened by fires.

What Tony said were demolition plumes were actually air pressure plumes from the collapsing floors. A sharp eye could see they couldn't be from explosives in the core because the source was too close to the wall they were blasting out of. There were no detonation flashes from those plumes, their source was definitely pneumatic.

Albert - I've read your extensive and insistent posts in this thread with a sense of wonder, and have extracted the comments above as an example of your recent enquiries.

You are now writing about the collapse of 9/11 with what appears to be an expert degree of architectural and scientific knowledge.

In my judgement, Tony Szamboti is doing a good job of rebutting your arguments but still you keep jabbing away. Which is fine - that's part of the rationale for DPF. And Tony seems more than able to look after himself and the case he is proposing.

Before seeing these recent exchanges, I would have expected you to be more on Tony Szamboti's side of the argument than Jeffrey Orling's.

Has anything caused you to change your mind?

Jan