Still Standing After 1.8 Million Tons Fell On It!, A Photo Essay About the Last WTC Steel Column Standing Options

[JimMac]

Hi folks, I did a little web page today on the subject of the last steel column standing in the pit of WTC2.

There are a few articles written on this item and in one the writer states that its a South Tower SE corner perimeter column. I did some homework, and determined it is more likely to be a core column due to its width (5' +) and size (60 tons) and the location.

Why is location important? My opinion is that its virtually impossible to have 1 million tons plus of debris fall, starting at 1360 ft above grade (add 70ft sub-grade elevation) and land on this steel column at the core, with the result we see in the photos.

What do you think?

Now we get to the real interesting question... why is only one column FOUND left in tact. I have a pretty good guess why, but i'll leave it alone for now.

Cheers!

Jim

This post has been edited by JimMac: May 28 2009, 02:11 AM

[lunk]

I read your web page, but I still haven't figured out what you are getting at.

Why is the remaining column still standing after the tower fell on it?

When Nagasaki and Hiroshima were nuked, the only parts of the cities which remained standing were right underneath the explosions.

I thought that this was what you were on about.
Sorry.

(edit) pluralizations

This post has been edited by lunk: May 28 2009, 10:14 AM

[JimMac]

I read your web page, but I still haven't figured out what you are getting at.

Why is the remaining column still standing after the tower fell on it?

When Nagasaki and Hiroshima were nuked, the only parts of the cities which remained standing were right underneath the explosions.

I thought that this was what you were on about.
Sorry.

(edit) pluralizations

Ok, i'm going to apologize for my mouth. Sorry to snap at you. Nearly every time I post on structural elements here, you bring up the nukes and I find that very disconcerting. If i counter, then it will become a nuke-debate.

As one of your posts on this subject stated (paraphrasing) that there were no architectural plans released/available i thought you might shown some interest that there are indeed a full set of drawings available.

The intent of the web page, was to illustrate what did not happen, (as opposed to what happened). The collection of photo's and their interpretation show that a pancake-like collapse, with a pile-driver like force (as the N.I.S.T. theory supports), would not have suddenly ceased crushing beams and columns at some elevation. The fact that the sub-levels are below grade makes no difference. In one close-up photo alone, there are nine columns observed to be still intact, standing. The towers did not collapse, end of story.

As for the nuke business, it belongs in the debate forum IMHO. The significance of the WTC demolition cannot be overstated. Its the one phenomena, of all the many hundreds of 9/11 contentious 'facts' that can be demonstratively proven. By introducing nukes the entire matter instantly suffers credibility. That's all i'm going to say on the nuke issue.

This post has been edited by JimMac: May 28 2009, 03:45 PM