I read a few weeks ago that Saudi Arabia was in the process of building a cloudscraper that's 1 kilometer high. For the metrically challenged, that's 3,280 feet (thanks Google for converting that for me). Burj al Khalifa is 500 feet shorter.

The fire reported in this post appears to be from the ground level up a bunch of stories (or from the upper level down). Pretty high, but at least they can make an effort to attack the lower stories.

How do you attack a fire that's 1 kilometer up? This link - http://www.rand.org/news/press/2012/07/30.html - observes that helicopters can drop up to 3,000 gallons of water/fire retardant on a forest fire. Can the same be used when fighting a skycraper fire?

My mother worked at the World Trade Center a gazillion years ago. I have to ask her how she felt about that? Not wrt 9/11 but about the more prosaic threat of fire. Frankly, I can't imagine living/working in a building that's over 1,000 feet, much less one that's 2,000 or 3,000 feet.

not in the Burj

when the heat melts all the support structures.

are you saying it won't collapse?

The potential problems with the WTC buildings were well known and built that way regardless.

Funny that no building codes were changed after 9/11 when a fire supposedly brought down skyscrapers. And don't bother answering about the jet fuel. it burned up quickly and can't get hot enough to melt steel. And no one has ever officially explained how Building 7 fell at free fall after a small office fire.

And after grandfathering the towers and other buildings out, the codes had significant revisions.
(Too costly to change, they claimed)

Among the issues, a sustained wind at a specific speed and direction might have caused the towers to move harmonically. They fixed that by setting up subtle wind screens.
The real issue was the fire retardant used on the I-beams. Truly poor quality and quantity.

You are just unwilling to accept facts.


This type of crazy conspiracy theorist should be an autoban from DU.


Only a complete and utter IDIOT believes that the planes didn't bring the towers down.

Complete and Utter Idiot checking in.

speaking in clichés? It is I who has to admit to a problem in order to have it solved, n'est çe pas?

I don't think either one of us has difficulty accepting our own position. All is well.

Fine.

Be nice if you could keep it confined to Creative Speculation where the conspiracy bullshit belongs.

sounds like a worthwhile forum, and I will consider it. Surely I will learn through you and this suggestion.
I don't, by the way, think labels are necessary.

he/she sounds a lot like god.

Peace to you Mira

Atheism can be a type of fundy religion too, as can an extremist belief in "science".

too. Can't quite get my mind across all those molten puddles months after the fact

there are rational explanations for most Truther CTs.

Because thermite burns at 4500 degrees F more or less. But not hot enough to melt the steel that was melted under all three buildings!
Do you think #7 was clad with Al. It's already been proven that the molten metal was not Al but you keep carrying that water.

there was no thermite in the rubble pile.

are you just pulling that bullshit from your ass again? Over 2400 architects and engineers and scientist disagree with you but then they know what they're talking about too unlike you.

But you know that already.

Most don't even know there was a third collapse on 911. What I know is you are making shit up again! I can point to a website where my assertion is proved, you cannot! http://www.ae911truth.org/signatures/ae.html

When you actually pull that string all you get is third hand ambiguous comments .

And no, there is absolutely no evidence that unburnt termite was found. None at all.

you just choose to deny it!

is a ploy to make up for a lack of factual counter point.

ploy at dissuasion. Holiday Season with wacky conservative relatives tend to bring this freshly to light. My voicebox is raw not indulged to being the holiday doormat this year.

Stay Strong DG!

Your ad hominem should get you banned! No plane hit building 7! Jet fuel doesn't melt steel within an hour! Especialy under all three buildings!

I thunk you're looking for the Alex Jones Show.

Just so absurd.

I put all "troofers" on "Fool Ignore." So I'm adding you and the 2 idiots below who agree with you.

Why are you calling people names who simply don't fall for nonsense? But then I do have 2400 plus architects and engineers and scientists that agree with me so fucking believe what ever bulshit you want to believe but I won't be such an authoritarian gullible pawn!

The "2,400" just signed a petition that demands an independent investigation.

Investigations by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have concluded that the buildings collapsed as a result of the impacts of the planes and of the fires that resulted from them. In 2005, a report from the National Institute of Standards and Technology concluded that the destruction of the World Trade Center towers was the result of progressive collapse initiated by the jet impacts and the resultant fires. A 2008 NIST report described a similar progressive collapse as the cause of the destruction of the third tallest building located at the World Trade Center site, the 7 WTC. Many mainstream scientists choose not to debate proponents of 9/11 conspiracy theories, saying they do not want to lend them unwarranted credibility. The NIST explanation of collapse is universally accepted by the structural engineering, and structural mechanics research communities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architects_%26_Engineers_for_9/11_Truth

And you'd have to be a grade A moron to think you could secretly wire a 100+ story building for demolition without anybody noticing the miles of wire and exposed beams with 1,000's of pounds of explosives wired to them necessary for the task.

I know plenty that agree so ass/u/me all you want to.

....however that doesn't make it so.

doesn't matter. Keep assuming what ever.

I don't buy that story either.

It won't collapse because there is no jet fuel involved

Though tempted, we can't in this tragedy re-visit our own. It was drastically different. I feel sad for all involved and count on all the people getting out safely.
I feel confident about it, just as i do about that there won't be a collapse.

penetrated inside the building at all.


Also, probably related to the fact it didn't have a ~365,000lb aircraft full of ~20,000 gallons of basically kerosene slammed into it at ~520mph. Hence the sprinklers, baffles, fire doors, etc, all being in working condition.

How do you explain that? Point proven.

and wish genuinely it made sense to me the way it does to you. My life would be easier without the beliefs I hold about these incidents.
Additionally I am stumped about the implosion in just a few seconds of the 50 story World Trade Center building 7 with only a few small fires in it and no airplane at all.

before it collapsed. The firefighters knew it was coming down, and warned everyone. When towers 1 & 2 collapsed, they killed most of the firefighting resources in the area, both men and bone, AND water mains.


When a structure like that fails, it doesn't collapse higgledy-piggledy. It transfers strain across the entire structure. When it fails, it fails catastrophically. Like the bridge on I-5 in Washington near Sedro-Woolley when a oversized load snapped one support, the entire bridge fell immediately, because the entire structure was then over tolerance.

It's not able to bend and sag, it snaps.

I like to use this as an example of a load-bearing metal structure going over tolerance. The wings on this plane don't gracefully fold or bend. They shatter violently.

I would like for all of this to be explained to the many Engineers and Architects who have been interviewed and who have given testimony that specifically in building 7 the structure was steel -frame and fire proofed, and it could not have been destroyed by the isolated small fires barely visible from the ground.
We will respectfully disagree here.
I do not recognize what you are saying as the same as what I learned in my own study of the collapse of building 7 specifically, and I know we can find videos to support our differing truths quite easily, so we have to let it go.

By the way, the fire I see on my screen in the Dubai catastrophe is many million times larger than anything we saw in the little isolated flames in building 7, and that building is still standing. Though I doubt it will remain standing for much longer. This Dubai building is only about 13 more stories than building 7 was.

And it is being actively fought.

There's really no comparison.

If you want to see a fair-ish comparison, check out the Madrid Tower fire in Spain, on youtube. About 3 minutes into the video, the steel framed components collapse.

The ENTIRE building doesn't collapse because it is a hybrid construction method. Parts are concrete pillar supported, parts are steel framed. The upper penthouses are steel framed because it allows for thin walls, and wide expanses. The rest of the building has stout concrete columns.

All that is left standing after that fire, is concrete.

The new WTC1 is concrete pillar construction for this reason. However, it's only rated to withstand that sort of fire for four hours. A many-fold improvement over the old design.

Last edited Thu Dec 31, 2015, 08:46 PM - Edit history (1)

we all know how thin exterior finishes can supply such large flames with all the fuel they need to consume for such long durations.

Even if that were the case at the beginning, the very nature of a structure fire would dry and compel the vapors from combustible on the inside to ignite as well as long as a source of oxygen could be tapped.

on edit:

Lot's of rooms appear to be on fire

?1

even when the exterior has been quashed individual rooms still appear to be aflame

The exterior carries power, insulation, vapor barriers, expansion seals, etc.

Smarter people know better:http://www.ae911truth.org/signatures/ae.html

available the days after as well as during 9*11 that have been made hard if not near impossible to come by that can never be taken back. A whole generation will die off and still they will not be able to shame everyone to remembering it *their way*.

but, hey. I'm sure it's intoxicating landing on the side of money or power (or still hoping beyond hope that it will happen.... some day. - why does that sound so.... familiar? It's funny who they try to affiliate with RW nutjobs isn't it? but they say it First! that's what counts!)

Thanks for posting WB

keep it up.

And I hope history will not be written by the liars and psychopaths but I wouldn't bet against them.

the crackpottery of 9/11 truthers hailed as bravery. When did google engineering become synonymous with standing up to the man?

Celebrating ignorance should never be honored, yet you and your associates prize that over legitimate knowledge to the point where it's a badge of honor to invoke an argument by incredulity.

You've been here since when - June 2015?

I don't post there much anymore. Anyone who claims to still have questions is probably not worth engaging. All the interesting questions were answered quite acceptably a long time ago.

universities. To say nothing of the hundreds of thousands in the field with millions of man-hours of experience.

You found less than three thousand. Wow. Oh boy. You sure got me there.

Here's a report on 7.



The 47-story World Trade Center (WTC) 7 building, which was heavily damaged by the collapse of the nearby WTC north tower, collapsed at 5:20 pm on September 11. A three-year-long investigation by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) concluded that the collapse of the WTC north tower ignited fires in WTC 7, which burned out of control on several floors because the water supply from the city water main had been damaged by the collapse of the twin towers. These fires caused the steel structure of the WTC 7 to expand and eventually buckle, causing the collapse of the building. NIST found no evidence of controlled demolition.

See the NIST videos on the collapse of WTC 7.


Read more: http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/article/2009/04/20090428110108atlahtnevel0.7957117.html#ixzz3vwpxh3E2




http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/article/2009/04/20090428110108atlahtnevel0.7957117.html#axzz3vwoB9cal

A jet aircraft crashing into a building wouldn't have any effect on its stability. I don't care how fast it was going or how much fuel exploded and burned. You have to be a fool to think that would have any impact on building stability. The fact is that a fire cannot bring down skyscraper and this is proof. You could crash ten jets into a skyscraper and it wouldn't cause any damage to the structure of the building. That's just simple basic physics and science. I am always amazed by how so few people understand science-'n'-stuff.

as imagining a firey bowling ball slamming into a re-bar lattice. re-bar lattice bends some but hardly bats a lash structurally.

I have yet to encounter a sane, intelligent 911 Truther.

Not unexpected from a 9/11 truther though.

The kind of people who will fall for anything and stand for nothing.

with those who are gullible enough to not need the truth about 911. Stupid plus severe Dunning-Kruger= Anti-truthers!

"9/11 truther" is code for what, exactly? A stupid person who wants to know what the secret government won't tell?

Looks like I may have found it. What of a disgusting pseudo-human being tries to score points for an idiot conspiracy theory while a building is ablaze and lives are at risk in real time?


And to any kneejerk juries who care to rule on my reply, I will be very happy to accept the hide.

Last edited Fri Jan 1, 2016, 04:49 PM - Edit history (1)

No matter how big that fire gets, I knew it will never fall. And that was a huge fire.

Not a threat to the structure at all. Zero comparison to WTC7, which burned internally for 7 hours with no water, and no firefighting response.

Praying nobody died but that doesn't look very likely, does it?

New Years luck.

They should all play the lottery!

In nearby Saudi Arabia, officials are still claiming that some 700 people died during the Hajj stampedes. Other reporting has put the number over 2000.

So I'll wait a while before I believe the "no injuries" claim.

It could very well be untrue.

That thing spread so fast it is hard to imagine that there were working fire sprinklers.

Witnesses on SkyNews are saying that codes are strong. It appears that it's the exterior of the building burning, but I'm not even close to an expert.

I think this document contains their building codes:

https://www.dewa.gov.ae/images/greenbuilding_eng.pdf

I would think that sprinklers would have slowed it down some but it never stopped growing.

measures taken, with fire doors, sprinkler systems, etc, that a fire like this is nearly impossible.

Something funky with this... or just really piss-poor building practices.

It looks quite bad no matter what the truth is about cause. I cannot image what it must be like on the upper floors above it.

I have never seen the exterior of a building like this one burn in such a manner. It makes you wonder what they skinned it with.

It should be very hard to perform a big arson like that, if the building has proper protection, though. One wonders if the sprinkler systems were working, for instance. Infiltrators got to that Russian civilian aircraft in Egypt, so anything is possible. News will be heavily censored.

The bottom, a Dalek.

Not really significant, just shows I watch a lot of SF.

Don't believe anything the Dubai government says about this. This is most likely a terrorist act.

They, as usual, will do their best to cover it up.

What's this about it only being on the outside? That sounds... unlikely.

"It looks like it's completely gone"
Ahmad Al Bader, a restaurateur who was at The Burj Khalifa with friends, watched as the fire took over the entire building, according to The National newspaper:
Quote:
I saw the flames just as it started and now it is out of hand. I can’t see anything because of the smoke.
They evacuated the people in the Address. My uncle and aunt were having dinner there and they were quickly rushed out, it’s crazy.
It looks like it’s completely gone.


Cher

Thank you for posting!!


Cher

any minute now.

Lighten up.