Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis
Albert Doyle Wrote:
Tony Szamboti Wrote:NIST also determined the failure initiated at the 98th floor and their analysis here matches those of others and is not in dispute.




Sure. The 98th floor is well within the 93rd floor to 99th floor impact zone. You fail to comprehend that it is perfectly reasonable that the collapse would appear to start on the 98th floor because that was the first level of stable, intact structure vs the unstable, wrecked structure below it that gave out. The load's "center of gravity" was redistributed to the first intact level, the 98th floor. When the area below that failed this intact area dropped as one unit creating the appearance of the collapse starting on the 98th floor, which technically it did, but was caused by the floors below it failing.

This is just pure nonsense.

Using a twenty step ladder with 12 inches between steps as an example I will describe for others why what you are saying can't be right.

Imagine the ladder is in the vertical position against a wall and steps 7 and 8 are damaged, with minor damage to steps 9 and 10, and very minor damage to step 11.

You are saying that if the ladder vertical side bar supports fail at steps 7 and 8 that it would appear to fail at step 11 because it is the first step with little to no damage.

You are also saying that even if it appears to fail at step 11 that it would have actually failed at steps 7 and 8 and we couldn't tell in a video of the failure taken from fairly close by.

The reality is that there was more than sufficient resolution in the video, so we could tell that a failure at step 11 is where the failure actually took place and we would have to find out why it failed there and not where the more significant damage was located.

Another point to remember about all of this is that there were not many core columns damaged on any floor, and there were none damaged at floor 98, where the collapse most certainly did initiate, whether you like it or not.

What you should be asking yourself is why the core failed at all.


Messages In This Thread
Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis - by Tony Szamboti - 11-08-2013, 10:43 PM

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  WTC-7 Before Collapse - Video of activities inside and outside Peter Lemkin 0 4,742 04-12-2015, 09:45 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  New Detailed Analysis of WTC 7 Controlled Demolition Peter Lemkin 0 5,059 01-12-2015, 04:42 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  The case against the NIST WTC 7 collapse initiation analysis Tony Szamboti 4 3,638 04-11-2013, 07:11 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  New Analysis Summary Of 9-11-01 Insider Trading [with some very interesting facts, if true]! Peter Lemkin 4 5,086 28-10-2013, 03:01 PM
Last Post: David Guyatt
  Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis: Redux Lauren Johnson 0 3,584 16-08-2013, 03:39 AM
Last Post: Lauren Johnson
  New Seismic Analysis Further Points to Controlled Demolition.... Peter Lemkin 0 3,533 03-12-2012, 05:21 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  911 Meta Analysis Jeffrey Orling 18 9,697 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 2,547 10-08-2012, 08:10 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  New theory explains collapse of Twin Towers- Aluminium and water explosions Magda Hassan 7 8,414 27-09-2011, 05:47 PM
Last Post: Jeffrey Orling
  First Wikileaks Cable possibly related to 911, Al Quaeda, etc. Peter Lemkin 0 6,336 26-09-2011, 08:02 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)