http://the911forum.freeforums.org/wi...t-t44-120.html

easy way to look at NIST garbage, 4-46 4-47, go down a bit
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZaeq...eature=related

NIST is mistaken, Gorg is lying, I said I read every word on the debunking site you kept linking, don't BS me, then I read the NIST reports in full,
ok simpletonian 1 min, 4:45 min (damn you're lazy)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lESol...eature=related

My reply was stating that what you said applies equally to both sides in this thread. Unless you have inside information that most of us don't have, you are basically basing your opinion on the opinions of others.

I never claimed to be impartial - I merely said that I am not a representative of either side (unlike Gorgonian who belongs to a debunking site which means the only thing he can do is attempt to debunk, impartial huh?). I want what everyone wants, a fully transparent, independant inquiry. How do you not want this?

are you saying that the buildings pancaked?

http://www.debunking911.com/index.html

and there's the site I read every word of, (is proof good enough for you?)
GORG is a LIAR

I'm saying it was a progressive collapse, which is commonly referred to as "pancaking" yes. Now, this is where you say BUT NIST SAID THEY DIDN'T SUPPORT PANCAKING, which is correct in a way. NIST said their findings didn't support FEMA's representation of a pancake collapse, which is not the same thing.

I told you you didn't want to do this.

Here is my first post with a link to the NIST report:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=589

Two posts later, you say you have "read every word on that site, find a different source"
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=591

I then asked you to confirm you have read every word and then asked you a specific question about its contents:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=594

You again reasserted that you had read every word.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=604

Please, get a clue.

oh brother. so weak! HAHAH!! youre a joke! go shill somewhere else!

What's the matter, don't like that I knew exactly the trick you were trying to work in there? It is true, they are not the same thing. If you would prefer, the answer is no, I'm not saying the pancaked. I'm saying it was a progressive collapse. Specifically, this is what happened:

In sequence:

1) The heat-weakened concrete-topped floor trusses sagged.

2) They pulled in the heat weakened perimeter columns in some walls,3 to 4 feet.

3) The weakest wall perimeter columns buckled first (east wall of Tower 2, south wall of Tower 1).

4) The top block tilted toward the failed wall.

5) Due to the pivoting top block the remainder of the columns in that floor sheared (horizontal forces) or buckled (vertical forces) beginning at a tilt of 2.8 degrees from vertical. (Bazant)

6) Because of the pulled in perimeter columns and top block tilt, the fractured upper columns were offset at initial failure from the columns below.

7) Because of this offset, the columns above did not hit the columns below, they instead crushed the thin slabs below. Therefore "No Jolt" at impact. (The weight of all the floors above concentrated only on each column's footprint in one case was about 200,000 lbs static load, landing on a 14x14" floor footprint that could only support about 150 lbs static load)

8) The floor slabs then pancaked yes pancaked at the rate of 8-14 floors per second past the uncrushed perimeter and core columns.

9) The perimeter and core tall unsupported, non-crushed columns thereafter toppled to the ground.

10) The collapse of the upper part of Tower1 was 12.82 s. or 65.5% slower than freefall (7.74 s.). The collapse of the upper part of Tower2 was 10.49 s. or 47.3% slower than freefall (7.71 s.) according to the Lamond-Doherty seismic records. -Bazant.

So part 8 is what you are trying to trick me into saying, but this is not what NIST said did not happen. What they said did not happen is a separate theory proposed by FEMA that they called a pancake collapse in which the floors dropped directly down, disconnecting immediately from the central and perimeter columns.

Sorry that your semantic trick doesn't trump actual science, though. I know you were probably excited.

No GORG, you lied, did you manage to look at what I said, I read every word on that site, not every word of every link, we have cleared this up
for the third time stop lying

What did you say about the collapses before NIST changed their story?
After their information was proved to be false.

NIST didn't change their story. They contradicted what FEMA said. I already quoted your posts above saying you read the document I linked you, too. I know you won't admit it, but I posted it right there for everyone to see, so drop it.

I haven't lied one time, so shove it.

Also, nothing I posted relied on computer simulations, but thanks anyway. Your crap is getting old again and you are about to go back on ignore permanently. Bring something intelligent or just go away.

of course he went right along with it without question like all of the debunkers.

Actually, this is untrue. I looked at the supporting evidence for it. Not that you would have any idea what that is like.

(btw if you continue on this line, you will get schooled pretty hard, as there is ample video and photographic evidence for this theory)

Collapse initiation. They (FEMA) said they believed pancake collapse was the INITIATION, not what progressed afterwards.

Just FYI.

Thanks. I thought I had screwed that up.

Here is an example of me just blindly taking their word for it. Don't believe the inward bowing perimeter columns theory, huh?

[IMG]http://911stories.googlepages.com/ST1******ST1-full.jpg[/IMG]

Firefighter Mike Cancel, Ladder 10:We could feel the building starting to twist above us. I called Ladder 10 three times, Ladder 10 roof to Ladder 10. There was no answer. I said we have to evacuate, the building's coming down. Again, there was no response.Source

Architect Bob Shelton had his foot in a cast; he'd broken it falling off a curb two weeks ago. He heard the explosion of the first plane hitting the north tower from his 56th-floor office in the south tower. As he made his way down the stairwell, his building came under attack as well. "You could hear the building cracking. It sounded like when you have a bunch of spaghetti, and you break it in half to boil it." Shelton knew that what he was hearing was bad. "It was structural failure," Shelton says. "Once a building like that is off center, that's it."Source