ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 

Notices


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags earthquakes , wtc 7

Reply
Old 1st January 2009, 07:35 PM   #1
Galileo
Illuminator
 
Galileo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,368
Would WTC 7 have survived the 1906 SF Earthquake?

OK guys and gals, here is today's thought question!

Would WTC 7 have survived the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake and the ensuing three-day fire?

Pros:

WTC 7 was a steel framed building designed to withstand multiple fully-loaded airplane strikes, had fire-proofing, a water sprinkler system, and a fire alarm system to to quickly alert firemen.

On top of that, other tall steel-framed buildings in San Francisco survived the 1906 earthquake and three-day fire, and still stand today.

Cons:

WTC 7 fell down from a small office fire on 9/11. Surely the wallop of the 8.3 richter quake and three-day inferno would have taken Building 7 out.

Thoughts?



Galileo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2009, 07:46 PM   #2
Bell
beautiful freak
 
Bell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 21,318
__________________
Every single day of my life has been worse than the day before it. So that means that every single day that you see me, that's on the worst day of my life.

INY
You gotta love cops.
Bell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2009, 07:49 PM   #3
stateofgrace
Guest
 
stateofgrace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,843
Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
OK guys and gals, here is today's thought question!

Would WTC 7 have survived the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake and the ensuing three-day fire?

Pros:

WTC 7 was a steel framed building designed to withstand multiple fully-loaded airplane strikes, had fire-proofing, a water sprinkler system, and a fire alarm system to to quickly alert firemen.

On top of that, other tall steel-framed buildings in San Francisco survived the 1906 earthquake and three-day fire, and still stand today.

Cons:

WTC 7 fell down from a small office fire on 9/11. Surely the wallop of the 8.3 richter quake and three-day inferno would have taken Building 7 out.

Thoughts?

http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/2550/sfingerzg2.jpg

Thoughts?

Sure, 2009 as come with a bang and you started the most pointless thread with the most ridiculous comparison/senario I have seen this year.

Well done, I am sure 2009 will bring you continuing success.

Last edited by stateofgrace; 1st January 2009 at 07:55 PM.
stateofgrace is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2009, 07:55 PM   #4
AJM8125
NWO Black Ops
Tagger
 
AJM8125's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,949
Some stood some fell. What's your point?



I wonder how many of these buildings were built over a ConEd substation and shared the some of the same construction attributes with WTC7.
AJM8125 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2009, 08:02 PM   #5
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,303
[content rearranged for clarity]
Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
WTC 7 was a steel framed building designed to withstand multiple fully-loaded airplane strikes
It was?
Where is this mentioned???

Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
On top of that, other tall steel-framed buildings in San Francisco survived the 1906 earthquake and three-day fire, and still stand today.
Are you seriously trying to compare the designs of buildings constructed one hundred years ago with absolutely no differentiation between the specifications of them individually? IIRC didn't predominantly steel framed construction become common practice until much later?


Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
Cons:
WTC 7 fell down from a small office fire on 9/11. Surely the wallop of the 8.3 richter quake and three-day inferno would have taken Building 7 out.

Thoughts?
Manhattan is not located in a designated earthquake zone and the codes applied for earthquake resistant design are not implemented there like they are in San Francisco today. If it were required to follow the same codes it would receive a failing grade. The question as to whether it could survive an earthquake would be immensely reliant upon the magnitude, and the frame's ability to withstand the forced applied to it.



Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
OK guys and gals, here is today's thought question!

Would WTC 7 have survived the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake and the ensuing three-day fire?
The severity of an earthquake rises exponentially with each increase in magnitude so without considering earthquake resistant design, a building like WTC 7 would in all likelihood have suffered the same fate in an earthquake of similar magnitude to the 1906 event or greater.

Now what in blue hell does your question have any relevance to????
__________________
AutoCAD/Photoshop Hobbyist
::Work Samples::
If you want a set (sigs/avatars) or helpful tips for photoshop and CAD. Always glad to help.
Grizzly Bear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2009, 08:02 PM   #6
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,474
id ask if the WTC was designed to withstand earthquakes (seeing as NYC is seismically stable) but instead ill just ask what is the point of this thread?
__________________
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein
defaultdotxbe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2009, 08:04 PM   #7
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,303
Another one of those threads where the analogy is completely irrelevant to the the event it's being compared to?
__________________
AutoCAD/Photoshop Hobbyist
::Work Samples::
If you want a set (sigs/avatars) or helpful tips for photoshop and CAD. Always glad to help.
Grizzly Bear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2009, 08:09 PM   #8
firecoins
Illuminator
 
firecoins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,206
Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
WTC 7 was a steel framed building designed to withstand multiple fully-loaded airplane strikes
Just the facts. WTC 1 and 2 were designed to withstand an accidental airplane crash with nothing figured in for the fuel. A smaller jet going in at slower speeds than what occurred on 9/11. WTC 7 was not designed to withstand any such event.
__________________
NY Paramedic, skeptic, 9/11/01 Reality-ist.

I am both right wing nut and left wing lunatic. Deal with it.
firecoins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2009, 08:10 PM   #9
T.A.M.
Keeper of the Kool-Vax
 
T.A.M.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,811
If a steel framed skyscraper falls in the forest, does anybody here it fall.


TAM
T.A.M. is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2009, 08:15 PM   #10
JoeyDonuts
Frequencies Not Known To Normals
 
JoeyDonuts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 10,546
Nevermind your "small office fire" was a conflagration on multiple floors.

Nevermind that it had been impacted by falling debris with a force orders of magnitude above TNT.

Nevermind that the FDNY pulled the firefighting effort for fear of losing more precious personnel.

Your argument, like Galileo's finger, is withered, old, and not really relevant to anything.
__________________
EXIT STAGE LEFT! EXIT STAGE RIGHT! THERE IS NO PLACE TO RUN; ALL THE FUSES IN THE EXIT SIGNS HAVE BEEN BURNED OUT!
JoeyDonuts is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2009, 09:09 PM   #11
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 54,416
Originally Posted by Bell View Post
♫♪♫And nothing changes, on New Year's Day...♪♫
WildCat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2009, 09:21 PM   #12
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 21,835
Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
...

Cons:

WTC 7 fell down from a small office fire on 9/11. Surely the wallop of the 8.3 richter quake and three-day inferno would have taken Building 7 out.

Thoughts?

What a false statement. Was there a massive release of truthers for the holidays? How many fell off the wagon? This is weird, there is not even a full moon.

There were office fires not fought, and the building was expected to fail or suffer damage that would be dangerous to people. Just like other buildings. There was no water for the sprinklers systems.

Oh, please tell me which 47 story steel building that burned in SF in 1906 is still standing. Go ahead, make my day.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2009, 09:26 PM   #13
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 21,835
Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
...
WTC 7 was a steel framed building designed to withstand multiple fully-loaded airplane strikes, had fire-proofing, a water sprinkler system, and a fire alarm system to to quickly alert firemen.
Prove WTC7 was designed for an aircraft impact; show me.

OOPS, the water sprinkler system did not work on 9/11! Do you know why?

You threw in the fire alarm for what reason? What a great 9/11 truth post. wow
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2009, 10:19 PM   #14
Björn Toulouse
Cavitus Rectum
 
Björn Toulouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,419
Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
Another one of those threads where the analogy is completely irrelevant to the the event it's being compared to?

Hey, it's the best they got left.
__________________
The most complete and happy victory is this: to compel one's enemy to give up his purpose, while suffering no harm oneself.

Belisarius
Björn Toulouse is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2009, 11:09 PM   #15
DavidJames
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Front Range, CO
Posts: 8,423
Is Galileo suggesting the 1906 Earthquake was an inside job?
__________________
I will no longer respond to those who choose to have tools of murder as their avatars.
Everyone is a skeptic except, of course, for the stuff that they believe
Beaver Hateman: Is your argument that human life loses value proportionate to the number of humans available? Malcolm Kirkpatrick: That's part of the argument. Value is determined by supply and demand.
DavidJames is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2009, 11:27 PM   #16
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,303
Originally Posted by Björn Toulouse View Post
Hey, it's the best they got left.
You mean the crippling limp from the start line?
__________________
AutoCAD/Photoshop Hobbyist
::Work Samples::
If you want a set (sigs/avatars) or helpful tips for photoshop and CAD. Always glad to help.
Grizzly Bear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 12:38 AM   #17
firecoins
Illuminator
 
firecoins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,206
I see Galileo is a run and gun type of poster. Makes a false statement and runs.
__________________
NY Paramedic, skeptic, 9/11/01 Reality-ist.

I am both right wing nut and left wing lunatic. Deal with it.
firecoins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 01:22 AM   #18
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 26,336
I think this can only be properly examined in one way.




























This just cries out, of course, for MORE PIZZA BOXES!
And you could stack 'em on your old Norge washing machine, set on Spin, to get the vibrations right. I'm not sure if Galileo's up to it, but I'm sure someone around here would be.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

Don't you wish someone had slapped baby Hitler really really hard? [i] Dr. Buzzo 02/13 [i]
Foolmewunz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 03:06 AM   #19
eromitlab
Muse
 
eromitlab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 921
Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
On top of that, other tall steel-framed buildings in San Francisco survived the 1906 earthquake and three-day fire, and still stand today.
Can you name one?

Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
WTC 7 fell down from a small office fire on 9/11.
__________________
With my reputation, I do expect everyone to take what I say at face value.
-Galileo
eromitlab is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 09:32 AM   #20
Galileo
Illuminator
 
Galileo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,368
UPDATE!

Pro:

If WTC 7 were in San Fran, it would NOT have been built upon a ConEd substation, and thus would have survived the ordeal.

Con:

The thermal expansion caused by the three-day inferno in SF would probably have exceeded the thermal expansion caused by the small office fire on 9/11.

Just some additional facts for ya to chew on and throw into the mix.

"Would WTC 7 have survived the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake and the ensuing three-day fire?"
Galileo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 09:35 AM   #21
Bell
beautiful freak
 
Bell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 21,318
Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
"Would WTC 7 have survived the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake and the ensuing three-day fire?"
What the hell kind of point are you trying to make
__________________
Every single day of my life has been worse than the day before it. So that means that every single day that you see me, that's on the worst day of my life.

INY
You gotta love cops.

Last edited by Bell; 2nd January 2009 at 09:36 AM.
Bell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 09:41 AM   #22
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,303
Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
UPDATE!

Pro:

If WTC 7 were in San Fran, it would NOT have been built upon a ConEd substation, and thus would have survived the ordeal.
So now you're changing the design specifications of the building you're trying to compare to?


Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
The thermal expansion caused by the three-day inferno in SF would probably have exceeded the thermal expansion caused by the small office fire on 9/11.
Uh... what? You do realize that thermal expansion is a function of temperature, not time right? (I really hope you do...)


Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
Just some additional facts for ya to chew on and throw into the mix.
Changing the design isn't quite the way to do it... Then again, comparing the two events arbitrarily doesn't make much sense at all either...
__________________
AutoCAD/Photoshop Hobbyist
::Work Samples::
If you want a set (sigs/avatars) or helpful tips for photoshop and CAD. Always glad to help.
Grizzly Bear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 09:44 AM   #23
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,769
LOL. Small office fire on 9/11. Priceless
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 10:02 AM   #24
peteweaver
Graduate Poster
 
peteweaver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,006
You ignore the way the building was built, you ignore the fact that none of the WTC's were designed to survive kamikaze attacks, you ignore the damage that was done to the WTC's, the comparison is just silly.

Older steel buildings were constructed using a grid, an immensely strong structure, but it doesn't provide that much floor space, to get around that the columns were shifted outwards, making a tube in a tube structure with floors suspended between outer columns and inner core columns. |--------------------------------|

This method hangs the floors like a suspension bridge.
Because of damage done to the supports and because of fire, sagging occurs, pulling on the remaining supports making them bow
)__________\this bit would sag most/___________(


Now only half the surface area of the column can actually bear the load, the rest is starting to suffer from a bending moment, with torsion and tension occuring, and not only that, at a molecular level, the metallurgical properties of the steel has been weakened by fire, losing its martensitic hardness that gives it rigidity.
Martensite is easily destroyed by heat leaving the steel too soft and bendy to do the job.
peteweaver is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 02:17 PM   #25
roundhead
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 824
Originally Posted by firecoins View Post
Just the facts. WTC 1 and 2 were designed to withstand an accidental airplane crash with nothing figured in for the fuel. A smaller jet going in at slower speeds than what occurred on 9/11. WTC 7 was not designed to withstand any such event.

Yeah, they always figure planes dont have any fuel onboard when they are flying around.

Sharp engineers and planners alway forget to consider that
roundhead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 02:49 PM   #26
Bell
beautiful freak
 
Bell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 21,318
Originally Posted by roundhead View Post
Yeah, they always figure planes dont have any fuel onboard when they are flying around.

Sharp engineers and planners alway forget to consider that
Oh wait! Burning fuel from a planecrash WAS concidered in the design of the WTC? Can you show me this? I bet you can't.
__________________
Every single day of my life has been worse than the day before it. So that means that every single day that you see me, that's on the worst day of my life.

INY
You gotta love cops.
Bell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 02:56 PM   #27
Earthborn
Terrestrial Intelligence
 
Earthborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 5,851
Originally Posted by roundhead View Post
Yeah, they always figure planes dont have any fuel onboard when they are flying around.
Actually, that's not such an unreasonable assumption. If in an emergency the pilots know they are going to make a crash landing (especially in a city) they will dump the remaining fuel because they know that a crash landing with fuel is going to be much more devastating than one without.

To answer the OP, a quote from this:
Quote:
I can see the Twin Towers... They are still standing!
__________________
Perhaps nothing is entirely true; and not even that!
Multatuli
Earthborn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 04:57 PM   #28
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 21,835
Originally Posted by roundhead View Post
Yeah, they always figure planes dont have any fuel onboard when they are flying around.

Sharp engineers and planners alway forget to consider that
WTC design was for a lost plane, in the weather (pilot can't see), low on fuel (cause if he was lost in the fog he would go where he would not be in the weather if he had lots of fuel), and landing, or lost trying to land. Landing speed is about 180 mph at 700 feet, and thus we have a low energy impact designed for in the WTC, and low fuel. However, the structural engineer for the WTC did say he did not plan for lots of fuel being injected (at high speed) into the WTC. He did not consider it, a slow speed aircraft impact low on fuel would not destroy the WTC, most the plane would fall to the ground and poke a few holes in the building, killing only those near the impact point.

The impact speed of the planes on 9/11 is what caused the damage and destroyed the fire systems in both towers. The fuel started fires on multiple floors.

Sorry, the design of the WTC was for a slow impact, and low fuel. Your point is lost on those who are not as smart as you are, or you say you are will all that common sense.

Where are the 47 story steel frame buildings that survived the SF fires and earth quake?

Last edited by beachnut; 2nd January 2009 at 04:58 PM.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 10:02 PM   #29
Galileo
Illuminator
 
Galileo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,368
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
WTC design was for a lost plane, in the weather (pilot can't see), low on fuel (cause if he was lost in the fog he would go where he would not be in the weather if he had lots of fuel), and landing, or lost trying to land. Landing speed is about 180 mph at 700 feet, and thus we have a low energy impact designed for in the WTC, and low fuel. However, the structural engineer for the WTC did say he did not plan for lots of fuel being injected (at high speed) into the WTC. He did not consider it, a slow speed aircraft impact low on fuel would not destroy the WTC, most the plane would fall to the ground and poke a few holes in the building, killing only those near the impact point.

The impact speed of the planes on 9/11 is what caused the damage and destroyed the fire systems in both towers. The fuel started fires on multiple floors.

Sorry, the design of the WTC was for a slow impact, and low fuel. Your point is lost on those who are not as smart as you are, or you say you are will all that common sense.

Where are the 47 story steel frame buildings that survived the SF fires and earth quake?
WTC 7 wasn't hit by an airplane.

You lie. I never said there was a 47 story tall steel framed building in SF in 1906.
Galileo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 10:08 PM   #30
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,303
Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
WTC 7 wasn't hit by an airplane.
And it wasn't designed for it either. Unless you intend to provide the necessary design specifications that indicate otherwise in order to bolster your argument.

Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
You lie. I never said there was a 47 story tall steel framed building in SF in 1906.
Everyone here is still trying to find where your comparison matches with WTC 7. All you did was point to an earthquake and subsequent fire and say "look at all these steel buildings that survived". Are you even trying anymore? If you want to make any legitimate comparison to WTC 7 you're going to have to do better than just point out that buildings survived both an earthquake and fire. Designs play every bit a role in structural performance, and I see nothing in your attempt that makes any effort to take that into account...
__________________
AutoCAD/Photoshop Hobbyist
::Work Samples::
If you want a set (sigs/avatars) or helpful tips for photoshop and CAD. Always glad to help.
Grizzly Bear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 10:09 PM   #31
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 21,835
Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
WTC 7 wasn't hit by an airplane.

You lie. I never said there was a 47 story tall steel framed building in SF in 1906.
The point is WTC7 was not designed for and aircraft impact, the towers were. But you have no idea what you are talking about.

Please show me by name the steel frame buildings in SF that survived the fires in 06, fires not fought. Please take your time.

Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
...
Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
Pros:

WTC 7 was a steel framed building designed to withstand multiple fully-loaded airplane strikes, had fire-proofing, a water sprinkler system, and a fire alarm system to to quickly alert firemen.

On top of that, other tall steel-framed buildings in San Francisco survived the 1906 earthquake and three-day fire, and still stand today.

Cons:

WTC 7 fell down from a small office fire on 9/11. Surely the wallop of the 8.3 richter quake and three-day inferno would have taken Building 7 out.
No your post, your OP was a lie. WTC7 was not designed for aircraft impacts, and you have not shown any steel frame buildings that survived fires not fought in SF.

Plus WTC7 was not a small office fire. Strike three.

Strike four - no fire sprinklers worked, there was no water! Have to revise this ball game.

Were there any 47 story buildings in SF in 06? Great comparison.

Last edited by beachnut; 2nd January 2009 at 10:13 PM.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 10:12 PM   #32
Bell
beautiful freak
 
Bell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 21,318
Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
I never said there was a 47 story tall steel framed building in SF in 1906.
There also was no earthquake in New York on 9/11.

What the hell is the point you are trying to make?
__________________
Every single day of my life has been worse than the day before it. So that means that every single day that you see me, that's on the worst day of my life.

INY
You gotta love cops.
Bell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 10:23 PM   #33
HENTAI DOUKYUSEI JP
Critical Thinker
 
HENTAI DOUKYUSEI JP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 461
Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
OK guys and gals, here is today's thought question!
is it.......Why are you wasting time coming here to JREF?
HENTAI DOUKYUSEI JP is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 10:37 PM   #34
AJM8125
NWO Black Ops
Tagger
 
AJM8125's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,949
I live in San Francisco. There are no 47 story high rises here. There's a 48 story one. There's a 52 story one. There's a brand new 60 story one that's just about finished and ready to occupy. For Bell's sake, there's less than 100 million chinese here. Another useless point, I wasn't alive during the 1906 quake, but did experience the 1989 7.2 quake from inside a 29 story high rise. It did not collapse. I did not die. What's my point? I don't know. What's yours?
AJM8125 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 11:41 PM   #35
Galileo
Illuminator
 
Galileo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,368
Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
And it wasn't designed for it either.
No airplanes flew into tall buildings in S.F. during the '06 earthquake. You are fighting the straw man.

Galileo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 11:44 PM   #36
Galileo
Illuminator
 
Galileo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,368
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
[color=black]

[color=black][font=Verdana]Strike four - no fire sprinklers worked, there was no water! Have to revise this ball game.
What's your evidence the WTC 7 water sprinklers would not have worked during the '06 quake or the ensuing fire?

Galileo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 11:50 PM   #37
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 21,835
Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
What's your evidence the WTC 7 water sprinklers would not have worked during the '06 quake or the ensuing fire?

...
Just say no.

The sprinklers did not work in WTC7 on 9/11, there was no water; WTC7 fires were not fought by firemen.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2009, 11:53 PM   #38
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,303
Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
No airplanes flew into tall buildings in S.F. during the '06 earthquake. You are fighting the straw man.

Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
WTC 7 was a steel framed building designed to withstand multiple fully-loaded airplane strikes, had fire-proofing, a water sprinkler system, and a fire alarm system to to quickly alert firemen.
You made the claim... whether it refers to the 1906 earthquake or not... Do yourself a favor and look up what a strawman is, because clearly you missed something when you read my posts.

Not that it matters, you've yet to demonstrate what examples specifically represent a comparison to WTC 7 and you've apparently ignored all comments criticizing your lack of emphasis on any one particular design that makes you case viable,
__________________
AutoCAD/Photoshop Hobbyist
::Work Samples::
If you want a set (sigs/avatars) or helpful tips for photoshop and CAD. Always glad to help.
Grizzly Bear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2009, 12:11 AM   #39
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,061
You know Galileo's just making these threads as an excuse to repeatedly post that picture of Mr. Galilei's finger.
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2009, 12:16 AM   #40
dtugg
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 7,885
Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd View Post
You know Galileo's just making these threads as an excuse to repeatedly post that picture of Mr. Galilei's finger.
Well wouldn't it be his finger since he is the Galileo? Yes, he has said this before.
dtugg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:56 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.