University Study Finds Fire Did Not Cause Building 7's Collapse on 9/11

[franky1]

if there were explosive charges
you would see the explosive charges taking out all the columns of every floor

what badecker is not realising is building are designed to collapse on themselves anyway when their colums fail

.. badecker thinks the columns failed due to explosives.. but there were no 'bang bang bang bang' explosives. there was just crumbing

2 things can weaken columns. explosives. and damage
the building was damaged due to debris from the planes in the buildings next to it

the study badecker got spoonfed wants to make people think that buildings fall like a lumbered tree, sideways.
but badecker is wrong.. they are not designed that way
 for many common sense reasons.. such as the building being in a well populated area so designed to cause least impact to other buildings should something happen

badacker cannot show any sign of explosives (the bang bang bang) and only crumbling of already damaged columns.. so is resorting to suggest that buildings meant to lean over naturally.. but only fall down straight if demolished,

just shows how small minded he is about most things as usual. mainly small minded about common sense

[Spendulus]

if there were explosive charges
you would see the explosive charges taking out all the columns of every floor

what badecker is not realising is building are designed to collapse on themselves anyway when their colums fail

.. badecker thinks the columns failed due to explosives.. but there were no 'bang bang bang bang' explosives. there was just crumbing

2 things can weaken columns. explosives. and damage
the building was damaged due to debris from the planes in the buildings next to it

the study badecker got spoonfed wants to make people think that buildings fall like a lumbered tree, sideways.
but badecker is wrong.. they are not designed that way
 for many common sense reasons.. such as the building being in a well populated area so designed to cause least impact to other buildings should something happen

badacker cannot show any sign of explosives (the bang bang bang) and only crumbling of already damaged columns.. so is resorting to suggest that buildings meant to lean over naturally.. but only fall down straight if demolished,

just shows how small minded he is about most things as usual. mainly small minded about common sense

Not only that, but bldg 7 had been essentially "hollowed out" to create a huge atrium in the inside. It didn't have its original structural integrity.

The building was situated above a Consolidated Edison power substation, which imposed unique structural design constraints...

On September 11, 2001, the structure was damaged by debris when the nearby North Tower of the World Trade Center collapsed. The debris also ignited fires, which continued to burn throughout the afternoon on lower floors of the building. The building's internal fire suppression system lacked water pressure to fight the fires, and the building collapsed completely at 5:21:10 pm, according to FEMA,[5]:23 while the 2008 NIST study placed the final collapse time at 5:20:52 pm.[6]:19, 21, 50–51 The collapse began when a critical internal column buckled and triggered structural failure throughout, which was first visible from the exterior with the crumbling of a rooftop penthouse structure at 5:20:33 pm.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center

[BADecker]

Like we're supposed to believe that the architects and constructions workers were so good that they could make a building that you could do just about anything to, and it would still crash, just at the right time, almost at free fall, into its own footprint.

Those jokers missed their true calling. They could have made $trillions in the stock market.

[Spendulus]

Like we're supposed to believe that the architects and constructions workers were so good that they could make a building that you could do just about anything to, and it would still crash, just at the right time, almost at free fall, into its own footprint.
....

Beats believing a "study" by two Chinese disinformation agents who duped one old doddering professor.

I think it would be relatively simple to design a building to fall inwards. First semester engineering statics, maybe the next semester dynamics. Maybe...

[BADecker]

Like we're supposed to believe that the architects and constructions workers were so good that they could make a building that you could do just about anything to, and it would still crash, just at the right time, almost at free fall, into its own footprint.
....

Beats believing a "study" by two Chinese disinformation agents who duped one old doddering professor.

I think it would be relatively simple to design a building to fall inwards. First semester engineering statics, maybe the next semester dynamics. Maybe...

Of course most European and US people wouldn't believe a couple of Chinese researchers. They're not of a high enough IQ to recognize what the Chinese found.

[franky1]

sorry but badecker has no clue about building regulations or building materials costs. or things like basic physics, weighted loads and other basics of life.

i know in badeckers world he thinks flowers and tree's can only grow if its natural wind blowing seeds randomly.
he doesnt realise that some people actually have skills to know what distance and what type of thing they can plant in a certain area so that it can gain most height with least disruption nearby to maximise utility of space
badecker doesnt think architects have skills and thinks farmers are just guys with harvesters.  badecker has absolutely no clue

[Spendulus]

Like we're supposed to believe that the architects and constructions workers were so good that they could make a building that you could do just about anything to, and it would still crash, just at the right time, almost at free fall, into its own footprint.
....

Beats believing a "study" by two Chinese disinformation agents who duped one old doddering professor.

I think it would be relatively simple to design a building to fall inwards. First semester engineering statics, maybe the next semester dynamics. Maybe...

Of course most European and US people wouldn't believe a couple of Chinese researchers. They're not of a high enough IQ to recognize what the Chinese found.

What did the Chinese find? A place to sow division and disinformation propaganda, by teaming up two subversive agents with a doddering old fool of a professor.

[BADecker]

Like we're supposed to believe that the architects and constructions workers were so good that they could make a building that you could do just about anything to, and it would still crash, just at the right time, almost at free fall, into its own footprint.
....

Beats believing a "study" by two Chinese disinformation agents who duped one old doddering professor.

I think it would be relatively simple to design a building to fall inwards. First semester engineering statics, maybe the next semester dynamics. Maybe...

Of course most European and US people wouldn't believe a couple of Chinese researchers. They're not of a high enough IQ to recognize what the Chinese found.

What did the Chinese find? A place to sow division and disinformation propaganda, by teaming up two subversive agents with a doddering old fool of a professor.

They simply found more proof that the whole 9/11 thing was an inside job.

[Spendulus]

Like we're supposed to believe that the architects and constructions workers were so good that they could make a building that you could do just about anything to, and it would still crash, just at the right time, almost at free fall, into its own footprint.
....

Beats believing a "study" by two Chinese disinformation agents who duped one old doddering professor.

I think it would be relatively simple to design a building to fall inwards. First semester engineering statics, maybe the next semester dynamics. Maybe...

Of course most European and US people wouldn't believe a couple of Chinese researchers. They're not of a high enough IQ to recognize what the Chinese found.

What did the Chinese find? A place to sow division and disinformation propaganda, by teaming up two subversive agents with a doddering old fool of a professor.

They simply found more proof that the whole 9/11 thing was an inside job.

More likely they were paid disinformation agents, who fabricated results to concoct an anti-American story that naive, ignorant and gullible people might believe.

[franky1]

is badecker still being ignorant

ok one more time..
the computer generated model was not a model of exact representation of exact events.
instead it was a model of a building falling equally
which is the case for all sky scrapers for all main reasons of structure defect or demolition (both)

the other computer mode was a random model of a leaning building which is not even typical expectants to occur in most real life situations

the leaning building model was then told to be 'what should happen'
and the fall model was told as 'only should happen under demolition'

both statements are false
watching the actual video. it shows the building got damaged. and the side nearest the towers(south) took the brunt of it. and the east side just had a couple floors of fire billowing out

9-11 consiracists think the east side showing a bit of fire was the side that the towers were on.. it was not
most of the damage was on the south side.

the south side fell first. which then weakened the rest of the building. and then it a came down. as designed it should do

[BADecker]

if there were explosive charges
you would see the explosive charges taking out all the columns of every floor

If you were close enough to see this, you would be dead, long before you recognized what you saw.

what badecker is not realising is building are designed to collapse on themselves anyway when their colums fail

.. badecker thinks the columns failed due to explosives.. but there were no 'bang bang bang bang' explosives. there was just crumbing

But if you want to see the explosive residue found in the Twin Towers, watch this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkaX5n3pfZE and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOWWSjol6Ps.

2 things can weaken columns. explosives. and damage
the building was damaged due to debris from the planes in the buildings next to it

These buildings were designed to withstand plane hits like the ones that happened on 9/11.

the study badecker got spoonfed wants to make people think that buildings fall like a lumbered tree, sideways.
but badecker is wrong.. they are not designed that way
 for many common sense reasons.. such as the building being in a well populated area so designed to cause least impact to other buildings should something happen

Demolition experts can barely cause buildings to fall the way they want when the whole demolition is controlled. So you think that the design from years before could make the buildings fall... like the designers had a crystal ball? If you get any sillier... oh go ahead. We need some more laughs.

badacker cannot show any sign of explosives (the bang bang bang) and only crumbling of already damaged columns.. so is resorting to suggest that buildings meant to lean over naturally.. but only fall down straight if demolished,

just shows how small minded he is about most things as usual. mainly small minded about common sense

Explosions in the Towers before the collapses: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_A9X_8flGeM, and the explosions, themselves, this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnyiT9gCYlA.

Sorry franky1. You better go back to school. What!? You never attended school? I take off my hat to you. You are doing very well for somebody who never went to school.

[Spendulus]

if there were explosive charges
you would see the explosive charges taking out all the columns of every floor

If you were close enough to see this, you would be dead, long before you recognized what you saw.

what badecker is not realising is building are designed to collapse on themselves anyway when their colums fail

.. badecker thinks the columns failed due to explosives.. but there were no 'bang bang bang bang' explosives. there was just crumbing

But if you want to see the explosive residue found in the Twin Towers, watch this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkaX5n3pfZE and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOWWSjol6Ps.

2 things can weaken columns. explosives. and damage
the building was damaged due to debris from the planes in the buildings next to it

These buildings were designed to withstand plane hits like the ones that happened on 9/11.

the study badecker got spoonfed wants to make people think that buildings fall like a lumbered tree, sideways.
but badecker is wrong.. they are not designed that way
 for many common sense reasons.. such as the building being in a well populated area so designed to cause least impact to other buildings should something happen

Demolition experts can barely cause buildings to fall the way they want when the whole demolition is controlled. So you think that the design from years before could make the buildings fall... like the designers had a crystal ball? If you get any sillier... oh go ahead. We need some more laughs.

badacker cannot show any sign of explosives (the bang bang bang) and only crumbling of already damaged columns.. so is resorting to suggest that buildings meant to lean over naturally.. but only fall down straight if demolished,

just shows how small minded he is about most things as usual. mainly small minded about common sense

Explosions in the Towers before the collapses: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_A9X_8flGeM, and the explosions, themselves, this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnyiT9gCYlA.

Sorry franky1. You better go back to school. What!? You never attended school? I take off my hat to you. You are doing very well for somebody who never went to school.

So now the "proof" is not from paid Chinese spies disinformation to "Youtube proof."

And no, there wasn't any bang-bangs in those towers. But if there were, then can you please provide all that info to the US military? They might want to be sure that our troops only shoot an enemy when a land mine is going off under his feet. You know, just to be sure?

[BADecker]

if there were explosive charges
you would see the explosive charges taking out all the columns of every floor

If you were close enough to see this, you would be dead, long before you recognized what you saw.

what badecker is not realising is building are designed to collapse on themselves anyway when their colums fail

.. badecker thinks the columns failed due to explosives.. but there were no 'bang bang bang bang' explosives. there was just crumbing

But if you want to see the explosive residue found in the Twin Towers, watch this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkaX5n3pfZE and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOWWSjol6Ps.

2 things can weaken columns. explosives. and damage
the building was damaged due to debris from the planes in the buildings next to it

These buildings were designed to withstand plane hits like the ones that happened on 9/11.

the study badecker got spoonfed wants to make people think that buildings fall like a lumbered tree, sideways.
but badecker is wrong.. they are not designed that way
 for many common sense reasons.. such as the building being in a well populated area so designed to cause least impact to other buildings should something happen

Demolition experts can barely cause buildings to fall the way they want when the whole demolition is controlled. So you think that the design from years before could make the buildings fall... like the designers had a crystal ball? If you get any sillier... oh go ahead. We need some more laughs.

badacker cannot show any sign of explosives (the bang bang bang) and only crumbling of already damaged columns.. so is resorting to suggest that buildings meant to lean over naturally.. but only fall down straight if demolished,

just shows how small minded he is about most things as usual. mainly small minded about common sense

Explosions in the Towers before the collapses: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_A9X_8flGeM, and the explosions, themselves, this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnyiT9gCYlA.

Sorry franky1. You better go back to school. What!? You never attended school? I take off my hat to you. You are doing very well for somebody who never went to school.

So now the "proof" is not from paid Chinese spies disinformation to "Youtube proof."

And no, there wasn't any bang-bangs in those towers. But if there were, then can you please provide all that info to the US military? They might want to be sure that our troops only shoot an enemy when a land mine is going off under his feet. You know, just to be sure?

Well, make up your mind. First you say its from paid Chinese spies, and now you say it isn't.

You were there? Listening for bangs in the Towers? Other witnesses say there were bangs in the Towers. Watch the videos, or search. You know how, right?

[franky1]

oh badecker.

it must really hurt when someone calls you out on your lack of common sense.
i do like how you flip flop to try hiding that you ever were as dumb on the flop as you pretend not to be on the flip. but a couple days later you return back to the flop again. and it just makes your whole comedy routing stale.

try some new material. its become obvious you dont know 99.9% of the stuff you talk about
atleast spend a couple days trying to learn something. and just make a little effort in actually trying to provide something useful and factual

[Spendulus]

So now the "proof" is not from paid Chinese spies disinformation to "Youtube proof."
...

Well, make up your mind. First you say its from paid Chinese spies, and now you say it isn't.

You are trying to shift the subject to the Towers. The subject... YOUR subject... is building 7.

It's not me that has to make you a mind. It's You. You said the Chinese spies were "Proof", now you are trying to use an alternate "proof", Youtube videos. They are about the towers, not building 7. But somehow something there supports your ideas?

I don't think so. But what do I know? You have some Youtube videos made by more Chinese disinformation agents or those they paid?

[BADecker]

So now the "proof" is not from paid Chinese spies disinformation to "Youtube proof."
...

Well, make up your mind. First you say its from paid Chinese spies, and now you say it isn't.

You are trying to shift the subject to the Towers. The subject... YOUR subject... is building 7.

It's not me that has to make you a mind. It's You. You said the Chinese spies were "Proof", now you are trying to use an alternate "proof", Youtube videos. They are about the towers, not building 7. But somehow something there supports your ideas?

I don't think so. But what do I know? You have some Youtube videos made by more Chinese disinformation agents or those they paid?

What is it with you? I simply reported an article so that people can see the other side of the story. But it somehow hurts your itty-bitty feewings enough that you are trying to make a personal thing out of it. What's the matter? Are you one of those Americans that fought in WW2 or Viet Nam or Korea, and you just can't believe that there would be somebody in the USA government who would dishonor you so badly?

Wake up, buddy. They are playing you. And the longer you let them, the bigger of a play it will be.

[Spendulus]

So now the "proof" is not from paid Chinese spies disinformation to "Youtube proof."
...

Well, make up your mind. First you say its from paid Chinese spies, and now you say it isn't.

You are trying to shift the subject to the Towers. The subject... YOUR subject... is building 7.

It's not me that has to make you a mind. It's You. You said the Chinese spies were "Proof", now you are trying to use an alternate "proof", Youtube videos. They are about the towers, not building 7. But somehow something there supports your ideas?

I don't think so. But what do I know? You have some Youtube videos made by more Chinese disinformation agents or those they paid?

What is it with you? I simply reported an article so that people can see the other side of the story. ....

Be my guest, post more Chinese propaganda.

[BADecker]

So now the "proof" is not from paid Chinese spies disinformation to "Youtube proof."
...

Well, make up your mind. First you say its from paid Chinese spies, and now you say it isn't.

You are trying to shift the subject to the Towers. The subject... YOUR subject... is building 7.

It's not me that has to make you a mind. It's You. You said the Chinese spies were "Proof", now you are trying to use an alternate "proof", Youtube videos. They are about the towers, not building 7. But somehow something there supports your ideas?

I don't think so. But what do I know? You have some Youtube videos made by more Chinese disinformation agents or those they paid?

What is it with you? I simply reported an article so that people can see the other side of the story. ....

Be my guest, post more Chinese propaganda.

You wouldn't know what propaganda was if it jumped up and bit you in the eyeball.

[franky1]

we get it badecker wants to show this forum 'the other side of the story'
problem is he is grabbing at the shelves of the sci-fi/fantasy section of the library

we know badecker is super religious
in a library there is sections that talk about religion philosopically. some have it in the childrens section where its made into child friendly stories. some have it in horror and disaster sections like stories of plagues/noahs ark..

but badecker is only grabbing at the fantasy/scifi section for all his knowledge about everything.
he wouldnt know where the philosophy section was even if someone pointed him in its direction.

let alone know where to look for actual fact

[Spendulus]

we get it badecker wants to show this forum 'the other side of the story'
problem is he is grabbing at the shelves of the sci-fi/fantasy section of the library

we know badecker is super religious
in a library there is sections that talk about religion philosopically. some have it in the childrens section where its made into child friendly stories. some have it in horror and disaster sections like stories of plagues/noahs ark..

but badecker is only grabbing at the fantasy/scifi section for all his knowledge about everything.
he wouldnt know where the philosophy section was even if someone pointed him in its direction.

let alone know where to look for actual fact

Badecker has so far created three separate threads on this forum each on a "miracle cure" for Covid-19.

1) a licorice extract
2) MMS2
3) vitamin C

And then, claimed that the symptoms of covid-19 were really those of zinc deficiency, using a chart with bogus information. Any medical study, and most nurses could immediately state the symptoms of zinc deficiency.