by Londonrake » Thu Oct 05, 2023 3:06 pm
by Robin Hood » Thu Oct 05, 2023 4:17 pm
cyprusgrump wrote:The problem with the ‘Controlled Demolition Theory’ is that you’d have to believe that there are hundreds, perhaps thousands of other buildings wired up with explosives in case of a terrorist attack. After all, they didn’t just increase Airport Security and lock Cockpit Doors at the airports the terrorists flew from.
Yet nobody has ever seen anything or found anything suspicious to this day. Nobody has raised warnings about the dangers faced by hundreds of thousands of people occupying these buildings every single day.
And you’d have to wonder, if the point of wiring the building(s) with explosives was to stop them toppling in the event of a terrorist attack, why weren’t the explosions triggered immediately when the aircraft hit?
After all, the ‘expert’ on this forum tells us that the underground bomb attack was that close (holds finger and thumb a few mm apart) from bringing the building town, toppling over on great swathes of Lower Manhattan. So if that attack was repeated, the demolition would have had to have been immediate.
And if the explosion wasn’t going to be immediate, why wasn’t the building evacuated before it was demolished, why were the firefighters allowed into the building before it was demolished?
Occam's razor is why…
Right off the bat, it's common knowledge that the WTC towers were designed the way they were designed for a reason.
The entire WTC complex was part of a larger plan hatched by Nelson and David Rockefeller to rejuvenate Downtown Manhattan's struggling economy and bring it out of the muck of urban decay. The Port Authority of NY and NJ demanded at least 10 million square feet of interior office space in the complex, meaning that the architects and Engineers assigned to the project knew it was impossible for regular skyscraper building models to meet this lofty requirement.
Minoru Yamasaki, in collaboration with structural engineers Leslie E. Robertson and John Skilling, as well as the firm Emery Roth and Sons devised a master plan for the entire campus, outlining how many buildings would be built and how much space allocated to each part of the site.
Skyscrapers were generally deemed inefficient and uneconomic because of the meager amount of interior office space they could have in comparison to the site area they took up, and therefore lesser profits, in account of the rigid steel skeleton frame system with which they were built, a system that necessitated the placement of structural support columns within 30 ft of each other. To make matters worse, the final master plan for the complex which included not one but twin skyscrapers meant that this building model would be too costly and inefficient for these towers, thus the traditional method of erecting high-rises was out of the question.
The towers were designed in such a way that it could circumvent the hefty costs associated with past skyscrapers, while at the same time be as efficient and as sturdy as possible. Each tower would be designed around four major elements all working in tandem to support the structure:
1- The exterior walls
No doubt the defining feature of the buildings in question, each tower was surrounded by a steel superstucture that consists of 236 vertical columns spread along 4 sides and tied together with the use of horizontal sprandel plates, allowing them to act as one seamless structural support system. Consequently, the load bearing exterior walls were extremely redundant, easily able to redistribute the load should the need for it arise. This is also the reason why the windows were so narrow and what contributed to their bulky stature or solid blocks of metal look.
2- The interior columns
A forest of 47 robust steel columns and horizontal beams topped by a 6-inch concrete floor slab located in the center of the buildings combine to form their own freestanding steel structure. Its purpose was a twofold one, on one hand it supported a major portion of the building loads and on the other it housed elevator shafts, restrooms, staircases, utility shafts and other critical services for the towers.
3- The floor beams
Save for the mechanical floors which were built with heavyweight I-beams to support the load of heavy machinery, all floors of the Twin Towers were built on a composite system of floor trusses supporting an upper corrugated metal deck and a 4-inch concrete slab. This design also served a two-fold purpose, the first is to support the weight of the wide-open floors, the second is to brace the exterior walls laterally and connect them to the core columns, making the structure more redundant. The floors were an acre in area, and about 3/4 of them were entirely open without any bothersome columns in the way.
4- The hat truss
Consisting of a web of steel beams and located at the top of both buildings it, much like other structural elements, served a two-fold purpose. It connected the core columns to the exterior columns to allow easy and instaneous redistribution of building loads if the situation called for it, and it supported a large communications antenna, although only the North Tower was outfitted with a broadcast antenna.
All combined, the towers touted 8 million square feet of open space, more than the Pentagon and MetLife, then PAN AM, building combined.
It's worth noting that the towers were built using Kangaroo cranes in lieu of the old derrick cranes. Kangaroo cranes were self-rising cranes powered by diesel motors.
As to why the towers looked the way they looked, this came down to the priority of function over form, in addition to architect Minoru's affinity for gothic modernist aesthetics and design and distaste for glass facades. His fear of heights also played a key role in his decision to make the floor-to-ceiling windows shoulder width.
by cyprusgrump » Thu Oct 05, 2023 4:50 pm
Robin Hood wrote:cyprusgrump wrote:The problem with the ‘Controlled Demolition Theory’ is that you’d have to believe that there are hundreds, perhaps thousands of other buildings wired up with explosives in case of a terrorist attack. After all, they didn’t just increase Airport Security and lock Cockpit Doors at the airports the terrorists flew from.
Yet nobody has ever seen anything or found anything suspicious to this day. Nobody has raised warnings about the dangers faced by hundreds of thousands of people occupying these buildings every single day.
And you’d have to wonder, if the point of wiring the building(s) with explosives was to stop them toppling in the event of a terrorist attack, why weren’t the explosions triggered immediately when the aircraft hit?
After all, the ‘expert’ on this forum tells us that the underground bomb attack was that close (holds finger and thumb a few mm apart) from bringing the building town, toppling over on great swathes of Lower Manhattan. So if that attack was repeated, the demolition would have had to have been immediate.
And if the explosion wasn’t going to be immediate, why wasn’t the building evacuated before it was demolished, why were the firefighters allowed into the building before it was demolished?
Occam's razor is why…
An ‘Occams Razor’ reply would be a simple reply............. the Twin Towers were innovative and unique in design and construction. (I think I have covered much of the following points ..... but not in detail ..... Occams Razor and all that? But it shows it is an advantage to have some background knowledge to answer questions from people like you! )
Quora:Right off the bat, it's common knowledge that the WTC towers were designed the way they were designed for a reason.
The entire WTC complex was part of a larger plan hatched by Nelson and David Rockefeller to rejuvenate Downtown Manhattan's struggling economy and bring it out of the muck of urban decay. The Port Authority of NY and NJ demanded at least 10 million square feet of interior office space in the complex, meaning that the architects and Engineers assigned to the project knew it was impossible for regular skyscraper building models to meet this lofty requirement.
Minoru Yamasaki, in collaboration with structural engineers Leslie E. Robertson and John Skilling, as well as the firm Emery Roth and Sons devised a master plan for the entire campus, outlining how many buildings would be built and how much space allocated to each part of the site.
Skyscrapers were generally deemed inefficient and uneconomic because of the meager amount of interior office space they could have in comparison to the site area they took up, and therefore lesser profits, in account of the rigid steel skeleton frame system with which they were built, a system that necessitated the placement of structural support columns within 30 ft of each other. To make matters worse, the final master plan for the complex which included not one but twin skyscrapers meant that this building model would be too costly and inefficient for these towers, thus the traditional method of erecting high-rises was out of the question.
The towers were designed in such a way that it could circumvent the hefty costs associated with past skyscrapers, while at the same time be as efficient and as sturdy as possible. Each tower would be designed around four major elements all working in tandem to support the structure:
1- The exterior walls
No doubt the defining feature of the buildings in question, each tower was surrounded by a steel superstucture that consists of 236 vertical columns spread along 4 sides and tied together with the use of horizontal sprandel plates, allowing them to act as one seamless structural support system. Consequently, the load bearing exterior walls were extremely redundant, easily able to redistribute the load should the need for it arise. This is also the reason why the windows were so narrow and what contributed to their bulky stature or solid blocks of metal look.
2- The interior columns
A forest of 47 robust steel columns and horizontal beams topped by a 6-inch concrete floor slab located in the center of the buildings combine to form their own freestanding steel structure. Its purpose was a twofold one, on one hand it supported a major portion of the building loads and on the other it housed elevator shafts, restrooms, staircases, utility shafts and other critical services for the towers.
3- The floor beams
Save for the mechanical floors which were built with heavyweight I-beams to support the load of heavy machinery, all floors of the Twin Towers were built on a composite system of floor trusses supporting an upper corrugated metal deck and a 4-inch concrete slab. This design also served a two-fold purpose, the first is to support the weight of the wide-open floors, the second is to brace the exterior walls laterally and connect them to the core columns, making the structure more redundant. The floors were an acre in area, and about 3/4 of them were entirely open without any bothersome columns in the way.
4- The hat truss
Consisting of a web of steel beams and located at the top of both buildings it, much like other structural elements, served a two-fold purpose. It connected the core columns to the exterior columns to allow easy and instaneous redistribution of building loads if the situation called for it, and it supported a large communications antenna, although only the North Tower was outfitted with a broadcast antenna.
All combined, the towers touted 8 million square feet of open space, more than the Pentagon and MetLife, then PAN AM, building combined.
It's worth noting that the towers were built using Kangaroo cranes in lieu of the old derrick cranes. Kangaroo cranes were self-rising cranes powered by diesel motors.
As to why the towers looked the way they looked, this came down to the priority of function over form, in addition to architect Minoru's affinity for gothic modernist aesthetics and design and distaste for glass facades. His fear of heights also played a key role in his decision to make the floor-to-ceiling windows shoulder width.
Being so smart ..... have you ever wondered why jet airliners don’t have ejector seats? But you have done Mr RAKE a favour ...... he has a ‘think alike’ friend!
by cyprusgrump » Thu Oct 05, 2023 4:52 pm
Londonrake wrote:I’m glad you posted.
Word was out that the “discussion”, having reached the lowest strata of minutiae, with 5/8” bolts, rather than addressing annoying distractions like “Who do you believe did it and what was their motive?” that you’d found a convenient tree and topped yourself.
by Londonrake » Thu Oct 05, 2023 4:58 pm
cyprusgrump wrote:Londonrake wrote:I’m glad you posted.
Word was out that the “discussion”, having reached the lowest strata of minutiae, with 5/8” bolts, rather than addressing annoying distractions like “Who do you believe did it and what was their motive?” that you’d found a convenient tree and topped yourself.
Oh noes, don't worry about me!
I've been busy on the beach with my SUP and I'm just off out to see The Jersey Boys so no more posts from me tonight...
by Robin Hood » Thu Oct 05, 2023 5:35 pm
cyprusgrump wrote: Oh such a relief!
So not one single other building in the entire World would be subject to collapse from a terrorist attack then...?
So it was just the WTC that was wired with explosives...?
I think Occam's razor becomes more likely than your fantasy conspiracy theories on a daily basis!
by Londonrake » Thu Oct 05, 2023 7:14 pm
Pyrpolizer wrote:So.... can the geniuses of the forum, tell us what happened to the core of the buildings? How many pieces did they find in the rubble, were they in their original shape and form, were they distorted, bent, melted, evaporated etc etc.
Robin Hood wrote:Your reply shows why Occam's Razor only works when dealing with sensible people. They understand enough to not make stupid comments!
Robin Hood wrote:..........................................But if you think that way you become a 'conspiracy theorist' to those that 'know' better ......... but they can't actually explain it!
Londonrake wrote:Same ole MO Mr Hood.
1. Confine the victim to an area limited to that which you want to "discuss". Such as to exclude all factors they believe pertain to the subject.
2. Drag the prey down into the long grass and there asphyxiate them with minutiea................................................................
Robin Hood wrote:But you have done Mr RAKE a favour ...... he has a ‘think alike’ friend!
by Robin Hood » Thu Oct 05, 2023 7:39 pm
Londonrake wrote:Pyrpolizer wrote:So.... can the geniuses of the forum, tell us what happened to the core of the buildings? How many pieces did they find in the rubble, were they in their original shape and form, were they distorted, bent, melted, evaporated etc etc.
Do you actually have anything that resembles an opinion on this subject? Or, is it just another, self opinionated, bully-boy comment opportunity?Robin Hood wrote:Your reply shows why Occam's Razor only works when dealing with sensible people. They understand enough to not make stupid comments!
I could fill pages with that sort of stuff from you. Which is why, yet again (inevitably it seems) we are at loggerheads. Then, you hypocritically complain about incoming. Like I said, you can dish it out but you can't take it.Robin Hood wrote:..........................................But if you think that way you become a 'conspiracy theorist' to those that 'know' better ......... but they can't actually explain it!
I've known you for over 15 years on 3 forums. On every one, without the shadow of a doubt, you've been that forum's "Mr Conspiracy Theory". They've always been your bread and butter.
What happened that day was "explained" to 2 billion people who watched it live on TV.Londonrake wrote:Same ole MO Mr Hood.
1. Confine the victim to an area limited to that which you want to "discuss". Such as to exclude all factors they believe pertain to the subject.
2. Drag the prey down into the long grass and there asphyxiate them with minutiea................................................................
And that's exactly what you're doing. Here are some fundamental questions concerning what happened that day. Please feel free to post your usual "I can't be bothered" type response. A silence which I submit actually speaks volumes:
1. Who did it?
2. How - and I'm not just talking about the blowing the towers up fantasy - how did they go about it?
3. Why? What was their motive?
4. They would obviously have had to coordinate with the Al-Qaeda attacks. How was that achieved?
5. How did it tie in with the Al-Qaeda attack on the Pentagon and aborted one against the Capitol?
6. Given what you say, a very large number of people would have been either involved or at the very least in the know. Taking into account how many died (3000 in Manhattan on the day. Plus of course those killed in the subsequent wars) do you think it credible that 22 years later the only "evidence" for what you're claiming comes from conspiracy theory sites? That is, in 22 years not a single soul involved in your fantasy has uttered a credible word about it? Really?Robin Hood wrote:But you have done Mr RAKE a favour ...... he has a ‘think alike’ friend!
I assume you're talking about Paphitis. That's a suck up to the boys effort. I don't know why you and the others on team Russia seem so keen to have us engaged. The man hasn't posted on this thread (can't say I blame him to be honest). Our main area of agreement has been wrt the Ukraine war. Even there his style of supporting the Ukrainians has been very different to mine. I concentrate more on sticking pins in the pro-Russian propaganda parroting balloons and have said little about the home country's campaign. Other that is than they've always been up against overwhelming odds and have been making a good effort in that respect. I have a lot of admiration for the people of that country. Another thread of course though.
by Londonrake » Thu Oct 05, 2023 7:47 pm
Robin Hood wrote:As I said ...... first you need to know WHAT happened ...... and you don't! Go play with your LEGO!
by Londonrake » Thu Oct 05, 2023 9:16 pm
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests
