How is it possible that a 47 story steel highrise collapse in 6.5 seconds?

Question

The more research I conduct into the collapse of WTC 7, the more improbable it becomes that the building fell simply from some damage and fire.

www.wtc7.net

Answer 1

I'm sure everyone's really grateful for your research - you no doubt being an expert in modern building contruction techniques and the effects of several hundred tons of metal and fuel crashing at 300mph into a building.

Go on - don't be shy publish your impressive list of qualifications so we can all believe you instead of you just looking like yet one more saddo who will believe any conspiracy theory that some goofball dreams up.

Answer 2

WTC 7 was "pulled" (I believe it was a NYFD cheif that used that phrase). This means that it was demolished, according to the official story, because it was too damaged.

The real question is the other two towers that fell. If you watch the video, it appears that the tower with the antenna was starting to fall sideways, but wound up falling flat into its footprint (at a freefall). Whether that is possible without explosives or not is still being debated...

For those of you not paying attention, WTC 7 was not hit by a plane. It was a smaller building in the complex that was also destroyed, roughly 7-10 hours after the attacks.

Answer 3

That it *IS* POSSIBLE is quite obvious already.

You asked "How is it possible" so I thought I would be explicit.

It Clearly IS Possible.

The definition of 6.5 Seconds is not fair in terms of Material Physics.

The building didn't collapse in 6.5 Seconds, factually. The building began its collapse the minute the Airliners (or whatever) hit the big towers, or the moment that someone pushed a button and dropped WTC7. Many people believe WTC7 was built to be leveled in an emergency. Nevertheless a chain of events was begun at the instant the 2 big WTC towers were hit, not 6.5 seconds before WTC7 collapsed.

I have my doubts about the WTC attacks, believe me. I have worked almost 30 years closely with PhD physicists, and many of them also have their doubts.

That said, I think it's important to approach any conspiracy theory with
the utmost attention to detail, else it will be as easy to shred the conclusion you make as it was for me to shred the conclusions arrived at by the 9/11 Commission.

in the end, all anyone will have is some level of doubt about what really happened that day, and who was involved, at what level of our government. Clearly, there's more going on than we're being told. It may well be that a reasonable doubt is all anyone will ever have.

It took 5 years after the Warren Comission declared Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman who shot John Kennedy, before conspiracy theories started to sound like they had alot of merit. Now, hardly anyone believes Oswald was a lone gunman. In another 20 years or so maybe we'll get more of the facts about Kennedy. If that's so, then maybe in another 60 to 100 years we'll find out that George Bush was in fact behind the whole stinking mess on 9/11/01. It wouldn't surprise me much.

Answer 4

Why is it you think of the gov. can take section in a masterfull, slick conspiracy and cover up ladden with issues which could bypass incorrect, and can't finished a shape undertaking on time and under funds? it variety of feels to me human beings such as you're in simple terms attempting to anger favourite and rational human beings and function some laughs. it is been stated and that i think of you completly forget the incontrovertible fact that 747 Airplanes have been rocketed into the edge of those homes @ 3-4 hundred mph. That actual weakens the strutcure. additionally you understand those little face mask that fall from the ceiling in case the plane depressurizes. what's that is going by using those strains so which you will breathe? Is that oxygen. ought to the plane had oxygen tanks on board that could help gas those fires? additionally ought to there have been some medical doctors or dentists workplace around that could have had oxygen or a plethra of alternative bottled, pressurized and volitale chemical compounds? the explanation your engine dosnt soften is using the fact the tempature is regulated by using the cooling gadget. maximum thermostats open between one hundred eighty- a hundred ninety and the followers come on everywhere from 210- 230. i like the belief of you draing your coolant and utilising your automobile. additionally eliminate the oil. Bush probably made some money off of it so which you should eliminate it in protest!

Answer 5

It is a good question, I asked the same thing at the time it happened. It seems that both planes were full of fuel, and the heat generated by all that fuel, pouring down through the building caused the steel framework to melt, that along with the sudden weight as it fell, caused the disaster.

Answer 6

note that the owner of said building actually said to a fireman....quote " I guess we should just go ahead and pull it then ". Pull it is a classic and long used word in demolition meaning, bring the building down w/ explosives.

The real question you should be asking here is. Okay the building came down by explosives. But it takes weeks to lay those out in the building....so how did they "pull it" within hours of the attack?

And to go along with this.....why do so many that survived the towers state...." weeks prior to 9/11 we had many security drills where we had to leave the entire floor for hours or even the day while we saw electricians and other workers enter ".

Who and what were those workers doing there weeks prior to 9/11? The time needed to wire a building for demolition.

Think Bush knew the attack was coming, sure. Think Bush pushed a button, nah.

Think Cheney did it all from behind the scenes...OHHH YEA. Look at all the moves Cheney did that day, the powers he took over and how he stopped NORAD from doing one damn thing.

If our country can kill a president in plain site and have the driver of the car do it and make the country believe some guy named Oswald did it....why not do it again but call it 9/11.

Look at who profits from this war we are in....then realize it is the same people running the country and the pentegon.

Those that say all this is BS and only Bin Ladin did this to us....you are so blind to what is really before you. Keep the sheet over your head....we think you'll be safer there too.

Answer 7

First, it was the sheer imact of the crash. Then, there was both internal and external combustion, causing an extra-heated explosion which most likely weakened the support beams. With all that exessive heat, the support of the building was sure to become very brittle. Also, with the pull of gravity (and the fact that those planes ARE pretty heavy) that probably affected the collapse time, too.

Answer 8

Since steel melts around 2500F it is improbable that a simple fire did not, and could not produce that kind of heat. The only thing that could have was a controlled detonation. Who's responsible is unknown.

Answer 9

If you do a few quick calculations, you would find that an object dropping in freefall from the top of that building would hit the ground in approximately 5.5 seconds.

A full second quicker than the building. Sounds reasonable to me. When gravity is acting upon objects, a second is an eternity.

Answer 10

did you calculate chemical changes of steel against superheated tempuratures(burn a can red hot and throw something at it...if you did it right the can should be ash other wise it wasnt hot enough)throwing something at it (as the planes did) should also cause stress on joints,rivets etc that are twenty years old,or build a deck of cards as solid as you can and pull a keystone card in the structure...same principal