This is in response to the 2nd part of shaman_'s post 103 in this thread.
The Windsor tower in Madrid only suffered a partial collapse:
This, after the fire had burned fiercely for almost a day, unlike the 1 and 2 hour fires in the WTC towers. Again, a picture makes it clear how fierce the fire was:
As 9/11 Research sums up:
************************
Because the Windsor fire produced a partial collapse, some have argued that it validates the official account of the collapses of WTC Buildings 1, 2, and 7. Because the same fire was so massive and did not produce total collapse, others have cited it as evidence disproving that account.
Steel Versus Steel-Reinforced Concrete
In fact, comparisons between the Windsor tower and the WTC Towers are limited because of the very different structures of these buildings. The Twin Towers and Building 7 were both 100% steel-framed, with large wide-flange columns and box columns, some measuring over four feet wide and fabricated of steel up to five inches thick. Severe fires in other skyscrapers which, like the WTC Towers, were 100% steel-framed, have not produced even partial collapses.
************************
Once again, to set the record straight on the WTC towers' cores:
***********************
The design was a "tube in a tube" construction where the steel reinforced, cast concrete interior tube, was surrounded with a structural steel framework configured as another tube with the load bearing capacity bias towards the perimeter wall with the core acting to reduce deformation of the steel structure maximizing its load bearing capacity. All steel structures with the proportions of the WTC towers have inherent problems with flex and torsion. Distribution of gravity loads was; perimeter walls 50%, interior core columns 30% core 20%.
***********************
So there you have it. A tube in tube, steel reinforced, cast concrete interior tube, surrounded by a structural steel framework configured as another tube. Combined, they accounted for half of the gravity load.
I already debunked your 'all steel structures are alike' argument in post 57.
Here is evidence that explosives were used:
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2104397&postcount=184
And here is evidence that explosions were heard and seen:
http://scott3x.tripod.com/wtc/twin_towers/collapse_chars/2.html
The WTC demolitions clearly weren't ordinary demolitions. Nevertheless, the amount of characteristics that they share with demolitions makes it clear that they were, indeed, demolitions.
The Windsor tower in Madrid only suffered a partial collapse:
This, after the fire had burned fiercely for almost a day, unlike the 1 and 2 hour fires in the WTC towers. Again, a picture makes it clear how fierce the fire was:
As 9/11 Research sums up:
************************
Because the Windsor fire produced a partial collapse, some have argued that it validates the official account of the collapses of WTC Buildings 1, 2, and 7. Because the same fire was so massive and did not produce total collapse, others have cited it as evidence disproving that account.
Steel Versus Steel-Reinforced Concrete
In fact, comparisons between the Windsor tower and the WTC Towers are limited because of the very different structures of these buildings. The Twin Towers and Building 7 were both 100% steel-framed, with large wide-flange columns and box columns, some measuring over four feet wide and fabricated of steel up to five inches thick. Severe fires in other skyscrapers which, like the WTC Towers, were 100% steel-framed, have not produced even partial collapses.
************************
Once again, to set the record straight on the WTC towers' cores:
***********************
The design was a "tube in a tube" construction where the steel reinforced, cast concrete interior tube, was surrounded with a structural steel framework configured as another tube with the load bearing capacity bias towards the perimeter wall with the core acting to reduce deformation of the steel structure maximizing its load bearing capacity. All steel structures with the proportions of the WTC towers have inherent problems with flex and torsion. Distribution of gravity loads was; perimeter walls 50%, interior core columns 30% core 20%.
***********************
So there you have it. A tube in tube, steel reinforced, cast concrete interior tube, surrounded by a structural steel framework configured as another tube. Combined, they accounted for half of the gravity load.
I already debunked your 'all steel structures are alike' argument in post 57.
Here is evidence that explosives were used:
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2104397&postcount=184
And here is evidence that explosions were heard and seen:
http://scott3x.tripod.com/wtc/twin_towers/collapse_chars/2.html
The WTC demolitions clearly weren't ordinary demolitions. Nevertheless, the amount of characteristics that they share with demolitions makes it clear that they were, indeed, demolitions.
