SkyscraperCity banner

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I don't get why the original Building 7 was called "7 World Trade Center" and was considered a part of the original complex, since it wasn't connected to the plaza in the same way how the other buildings of the original complex were.

And also the original Building 7 wasn't connected to the concourse area like how the rest of the buildings were. Honestly the original Building 7 should not of had anything to do with the original World Trade Center complex besides being beside it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
And also the original Building 7 wasn't connected to the concourse area like how the rest of the buildings were. Honestly the original Building 7 should not of had anything to do with the original World Trade Center complex besides being beside it.
It was connected by 2 walkways to the plaza and 6 WTC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,787 Posts
Whether or not building 7 was part of the original WTC complex is not important.
What’s important is WHY building 7 collapsed in the first place, when it was not hit by plane or got torched by jet fuel as what they blamed the cause of WTC demise.

It’s controlled demolition, plain and simple.
There’s absolutely no other logical reason to explain it.
Who did it, and why they did it. I don’t know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,956 Posts
Whether or not building 7 was part of the original WTC complex is not important.
What’s important is WHY building 7 collapsed in the first place, when it was not hit by plane or got torched by jet fuel as what they blamed the cause of WTC demise.

It’s controlled demolition, plain and simple.
There’s absolutely no other logical reason to explain it.
Who did it, and why they did it. I don’t know.
The collapse of WTC7 is a commonly used case study in fire dynamics courses, as an example of what happens to steel structures in a fire if the fire is left unattended for too long.

A controlled demolition in secret is also logistically impossible to pull off. Demolishing a building half the size of WTC7 usually requires months of work by a large crew of workers, when they work out in the open with a building stripped down to the structural system. It is completely impossible to do that kind of work in a building in full operation without anybody noticing. The number of workers required would also be problematic - someone would have talked, that's inevitable.

Also, demolition charges are loud. Louder than a thunderclap. As in, completely deafening at a distance of several hundred meters. A single charge going off would have been audible on every piece of audio recorded in lower Manhattan that day.

It's also worth mentioning again that the building was on fire for several hours. Good luck trying to find a brand of demolition charges that would work perfectly after hours in that inferno. The building was also so badly damaged by the fire that there wouldn't have been any point in blowing it up. Given the damages it sustained, it would have come down regardless.

"There wouldn't have been any point" is a pretty overarching theme for any conspiracy involving WTC7 in general. What would there have been to gain from doing it? Again, setting it up would have required an awfully large amount of time and manpower which would have jeopardized the secrecy of the operation. Some claim it was done to destroy an archive in the building. They completely overlook that blowing the building up in the first case would have required complete unhindered access to the building all the way into the load-bearing elements. If somebody had the means to rig the building to explode, they would have the means to walk into that archive and steal/destroy any compromising information gathered therein. It would have been much easier, too.


So all in all, anybody claiming that this was a controlled demolition do not have the slightest clue what they are talking about. Zilch, nada, nil. It's complete idiocy from end to end.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,838 Posts
WTC 7 was hit by 1 WTC falling debris then if you watch few video clear collapse few second if you seen 1 WTC stop about 1,010 feet about 2 second then collapse toward to 7 WTC.
It's this more likely by claim near Nassau street witnessed them no more than 5 people watched come down and toward 7 WTC.
If they're true then 2 people look at damage area overlook 7 WTC from 11 floor to 27 floor some missing on right side about 26 feet long and 290 feet high then caught fire more than 40 minutes later after 1 WTC knock 7 WTC then 5 people more likely correct about this.
Later they claim may be wrong place in 7 WTC was FBI place in 10 floor massive paper probably up to 150,000 perhaps caught fire above 11 floor by 1 WTC debris and no controlled demolition any at all and one person struck he heard whole thing couple of hours he said that giant hole about 7 floors he was 18 floor he said no controlled demolition.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
It was connected by 2 walkways to the plaza and 6 WTC.
But still Building 7 didn't have a indoor connection to the rest of the complex, which means that people had to go outside from the rest of the complex in order to access Building 7. The rest of the buildings in the original complex were connected (through the concourse) to each other in a way that made it so you could access all of them (except for 7) without going outside. Even the World Financial Center had a indoor connection to the original World Trade Center complex through the Vesey Street Bridge that was directly connected to the main structure of 6 WTC.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top