 |
| Your search for perimeter columns returned ZERO results |
Dean of Architecture "There are no interior columns in the World Trade Center"
In the reports, the terms “perimeter” and “exterior” are used interchangeably as descriptors. They relate to the location of the columns on the towers.
— National Institute of Standards and Technology (@NIST) April 11, 2022
 |
| I found that at least five documents had the term |
 |
| Folder "Exterior wall" should be " |
This was discussed in a screenshot I gave you in the first comment you left on this answer.
You never gave me any screenshot. My first comment was about the “perimeter columns” which was missing from five NIST documents and now NIST’s google drive uses the label “walls” over “perimeter columns” for their folder names which shows their criminal intent to scam the public into believing that a weaker building existed by any means possible. You agreed that they were doing this and were rewording their report this way to maximize the effect. They also never added stiffeners to their models or drawings even by 2022. They made small updates but failed to add “Girder to column Stiffener Plates” to any working model. The goal was to be outrageous and criminal.
NIST Updates
Why is some of the building not reacting to the collapse and why are you having such a problem with this issue?
You said [The phrase “east wall” refers to the perimeter columns. Why would NIST drop the term “perimeter columns” at all? Do you have an answer?
“The image you have shown here is addressed directly in the report”. I am not asked the report. I am asking YOU! What DO YOU think is happening to the none effected area?
I listed the documents which does have “perimeter columns” are you agreeing that those documents don’t have the term? What is your answer?
A bunch of half baked computer simulations
Example #1
June 2012 Errata to Structural Fire Response and Probable Collapse Sequence of World Trade Center Building 7 (NIST NCSTAR 1-9)
"Bearing seat dimensions for girder at Column 79. Pg 482, Analytical Model for Seated Connection at Columns 79 and 81, modification to fourth sentence in the 3rd paragraph. Pg 527, Thermal Effects on Connections for Floor Beams and Girders, modification to third and fourth sentences in the 3rd paragraph." basically 9/11 Truth discovered fraud and they made corrections, i.e the web was no longer supported should be the girder was no longer supported the "web" is not the point.  |
| bearing seat at Column 79 should be bearing seat at [floor X] at Column 79
|
What would cause NIST investigators to leave out 50% of the building from their 9/11 report?
- NIST NCSTAR 1-6D: Global Structural Analysis of the Response of the World Trade Center Towers to Impact Damage and Fire
No, they discuss this in excruciating detail. (the moron can't read. No perimeter columns however the switch is on with "east wall " which is exactly what I was talking about. He proves my point but is too stupid to know it.)
An OCR search of your image also returns with the same problem. The term "perimeter columns" is missing. Do you understand the words coming out of my keyboard?
The phrase “east wall” refers to the perimeter columns.
(this is the switch I was talking about)
Are you agreeing that “perimeter columns” does not exist Global Structural Analysis of the Response of the World Trade Center Towers to Impact Damage and Fire i.e the main NIST report and they replaced all “perimeter columns” with “North, east, south and west walls” or “walls” in general for what reason again? Why not use North, East, South and West perimeter columns?
NIST might have removed and replaced all instances were it could have said "perimeter columns" with a weak sounding "walls" because "walls" must sound weaker to the reader.. If selling a weaker building was the goal, than the report has to be considered fraudulent. The public will not discover any of this really small nuanced parlor trick nonsense. A search for "walls" returned 181 results. NIST is big on "Walls" columns not so much. You have to wonder if of ALL of NIST's energy into investigating 9/11 switched from trying to figure out what happened on September 11th, to figuring out how far they could push fraud. We know "hollow core" theory and "just air" theory was being pushed by the media, so setting up air pressure problem / solution theory i.e WTC was a "Bouncy Castle" Theory was just around the evolutionary corner, if only the budget will permit it. The theory goes, [once the planes hit the towers, the tower deflated and all the air pressure went out and the tower fell like a soccer ball]. Why not use "air pressure" to solve every problem?. Why not apply "air pressure" to all disasters and even medical problems.. Not feeling well? Well, that's air pressure. Plane fell down. NTSB "Well that was because air pressure." Think about the all time .. and money .. spent thinking about what happened when "air pressure theory" fits all situations. You just say it [air pressure] and the public feels better and goes away. Everyone moves on to next crisis. I am joking of coarse, but someone at NIST was thinking about this very prefect idea and removed [Perimeter Columns] from their report. Who knows how close Bouncy Castle concepts was issued as a serious concept to consider.. Is your trust broken yet?
This is the "NCSTAR 1-6D" We got Seinfeld core column shrinkage but not for cold water but from "high temperatures" this time. This kind of sounds like air pressure theory.
 |
| Seinfeld core column shrinkage |
"In WTC 1, the aircraft impact caused damage to some core columns," with the help of magic "The damage to the core columns resulted in local load redistribution to the remaining core columns" [They do know that the core columns where all different sizes and strengths, right ? The four corner core columns were giants, for example. It all sounds made up and like they didn't even care at all. The " some core columns" increased and spread to "much more core columns" and the damage also increased, i.e "fire-induced high temperatures caused the core to displace downward from plasticity and high creep strains in high stress and high temperatures. " They said "high temperatures" two times. How high were those "high temperatures" to cause which core column to do shrink.. We have shrinkage. In a few core columns someplace in the tower. They don't say if these core columns could cool and regain there strength or the speed to which steel begin reversing any lost plasticity..
https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=101366
 |
| WTC Perimeter Column with [thermite] ? |
 |
| Without burns he has has marks of a bomb victim i.e. kinetic energy damage |
Not really sure how you reach that conclusion, your comments are actively driving engagement metrics and getting more views to this answer - which has almost as many views by itself as your entire profile.
The public isn’t viewing this exchange, this comment thread is buried because I downvoted your response immediately, and I can casually delete it at any point.
Not to mention you negatively approached other commenters who have actual upvotes, and generally you’re trying to ask questions about things I cover in the answer so it comes off quite poorly.
This doesn’t get you any positive exposure or engagement, and mainly drives more people to my content.
It’s the reason I’m continuing to engage in the face of, well, how much of a non-starter this conversation is.
I am talking about my blog which has your comments saved. So you can’t even get that right.
Right, that’s why I buried this series of comments. I could tell you were trying to promote your personal blog.
That reminds me, I should check if you posted that link elsewhere and delete it. No point in allowing misinformation to spread like that.
I am trying to get answers which you refused to answer and I was not trying to promote a personal blog. Wrong again.
And deleting is all you got in the end, because facts and information is not what you do.
No, showing a screenshot of a PDF search is not trying to get answers, it is stonewalling.
I gave you the relevant information required to look this up yourself, including the document, section, and page number.
You shouldn’t need to use a PDF search. That indicates basic failure at research literacy.
“I gave you the relevant information required to look this up yourself,” this is too general. Are you copying pasting replies? They have cheat sheets which have canned replies for people working for whoever i.e. troll farms..
I never showed a “screenshot of a PDF search”
I showed a screenshot of a search result.
PDF searching is bad now? Is that what you are saying ?? holy cow.. This takes the cake. Good bye..
