Debunking 9/11 exclusive! ~ World Trade Center 7 South Side HoleResearching this, I began looking for images of the WTC 7south side hole the firemen talked about. The only photo's I could find had this massive hole obscured by tremendous plumes of smoke.
The WTC mezzanine covers the bottom half of the hole so we can't know how wide the hole is on the bottom floors. The skin of the building seems to be detached from the floors as if the north tower debris took some building 7 floors with it on the way down.
Just as conspiracy theorists used the north side photos to suggest that was the extent of the damage, (A few small fires) conspiracy theorists are now using this photo to suggest the photo shows the total extent of the damage. I emphasized the above because for some reason conspiracy theorists don't get it. Yes, I can't find a photo which shows more damage to the south side but conspiracy theorists who have been shown to be wrong time and time again also can't find a photo proving the south side only had the damage we see. I find this double standard comically obvious. What I found most comical was the suggestion that I had to prove this wasn't dust from the north tower collapse. As if dust would have come from just this building for 6 hours.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Afb7eUHr64UThis photo is copyrighted and was given with permission to debunking911 for use on this site.
Update:New video shows the gash on the south side of building 7.
If you count the columns which are visible, you can see this is NOT the corner damage in the FEMA photo below.
The above South West damage is taken into account in the graphics below.
Below is a graphics from the initial World Trade Center 7 report. This might change when the final report becomes available. Note the word "Approximate" when talking about the large hole. I suspect the only evidence they had at the time were the firemen's interviews which seem to be very close to the photo at the top of the page.
Conspiracy Theorists are hard at work looking to find the slightest discrepancy in the NIST preliminary report. The NIST report was created before debunking911.com sent the photo to NIST.
It's not unreasonable to suspect the members of the NIST who are investigating the collapse weren't there at the time of collapse. It's also not unreasonable to suspect they don't have much video or photographic evidence of the south side because they evacuated the south of Manhattan due to the impending collapse of this very building. It's safe to say they only know what they have evidence for. Yet the conspiracy theorists expect the NIST to have all the evidence at their fingertips from the first day. If any evidence comes up which doesn't support the preliminary hypothesis it's taken as a part of some mass murder plot. Yet these "Truth seekers" give Jones a pass as he changes his hypothesis every few weeks. I wonder what the word "Preliminary" means to a conspiracy theorist? To me it means "a first hypothesis" and not "This is the final conclusion". Science don't work that way.
As I highlighted above, the NIST said the locations of the damage are not written in stone. Look at the legend below. They use the words "Possible", "Less likely" and "Least likely". Yet conspiracy theorists ignore these qualifiers and try to paint the scientist of the NIST as purposefully lying and supporting a mass murderer because the graphic below may not be exactly what the photo shows.
We really don't know how much of the graphic below is right or wrong because the image only shows a small portion of the south side. Most of the building is covered by smoke, the WTC 6 mezzanine and the camera angle. It's blatantly dishonest to use this image to conclude their is less damage than on the graphic below. We just CAN'T KNOW from the image. We also don't know what other evidence the NIST has which support the graphic.
Note the amount of columns on the south face. There are 14 columns on the south face. Also note the column on the end right is spaced out farther apart. There are 5 in the image. We can assume the clearing at the end where daylight is visible is the end of the building. We can then fill in the columns to get a better idea where this hole is...
Green are visible columns, yellow are assumed. We can conclude this isn't the south west corner damage which only had a column or two taken out.The mezzanine under building 6 covers at least from the 6th floor down. How do we know? Because we can't see the louvers in the above image. No one can say the damage we see is the total damage. I suspect the hole became much larger at ground level given the collection of debris we see in the photo below.Note the large pile of debris and what looks like perimeter columns sticking out of it.
One conspiracy theorist has done an admirable job inserting columns in the photo to give us a better understanding of what we see. It's such a good job, for the first time I'm going to use a conspiracy theorist photo to make a point.
The floors in the conspiracy theorist edit below may be off. The point of this is not to say the conspiracy theorist did a perfect job in recreating the facts. You see, I'm not arguing the conspiracy theorist is 100 percent right on his facts. After all, he is a 911 conspiracy theorist. I'm arguing that the damage to building 7 is MUCH worse than conspiracy theorist would have you believe.
"On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom--approximately ten stories--about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out," Shyam Sunder, the lead investigator for the National Institute of Standards and Technology"Using this statement, the above photo and the conspiracy theorist representation of the columns we can get a better idea of where this large hole is...
The white box with the X in the middle is the area the NIST said was "Scooped out". The light brown rectangle would be approximately where the louvers were. The light green is the promenade which we know is damaged from the photos below.
Just what does the word approximately mean to conspiracy theorist? It meansexactly. Recently the conspiracy theorists have been attacking the conspiracy theorist who created the image I used. It appears the smudge used to count the floors may be from the 19th floor and not the 22 as the original conspiracy theorist thought.
I'll make this real easy, you can't see the louvers which end on the 7th floor so the word "approximately" could mean from the 7th floor down.
Lets see what that area looked like before the collapse...
As you can see, if columns above the bridge were taken out, it wouldn't be unreasonable to expect the mechanical floors (Behind the louvers and above the lobby) with heavy equipment to fall into the open lobby. Yes, the mechanical floors are built stronger but the heavy equipment equals things out. It's extra strength is taken by holding up the heavy equipment. There were transformers on these levels.
"WTC 7 contained 10 transformers at street level, 12 transformers on the 5th floor, and 2 dry transformers on the 7th floor." - FEMA report
Transformers are filled with oil and can blow up. Did those large transformers blow up taking out the floors below? Remember that the building was on fire for hours. It's well within reason to suspect the building was progressively getting worse. Conspiracy theorists seem to think one dimensionally. They think if there was light damage immediately after the collapse then it must have been that way throughout the event. This super simplistic thinking is the Achilles heel of the conspiracy story. They take photos of a part of a building and quotes from one moment in time and try to apply it to the whole event or building.
Another problem with the conspiracy story is the fireman's quotes. Why would they lie? Why would they say their was a hole which never existed. 360 of their brothers perished that day.
But the main point of the image is to show the building was FAR more damaged than conspiracy theorists let on. It was never a few small fires as the deceptive north face photos show. In that sense these photos are conclusive.
Below is another image which seems to show damage inline with the hole in the previous image.
A video has surfaced which shows the extent of building 7's south side whole. It was worse than even the firemen let on...
Someone took images from both videos and created a composite so we can see the extent of the "gash"...
Taken all together we have evidence the of a possible local pancake collapse as with the Ronan Point apartments...
Obviously Ronan Point apartments didn't catch fire or is a tube in a tube design. I have to state the obvious because conspiracy theorists have suggested that this event should be compared to 9/11. That's just another absurdity for the gullible.
Why is this important? Because it lines up with the fuel system in the building...
Conspiracy theorists have once again left critical thinking skills at the door in order to hold onto their beliefs. They use the photo below as evidence the video snapshot above doesn't show major damage.
In their zeal to find fault with this page they ignore the roofline which was inset on the south side and tapered for about 2 floors. This very photo is evidence of the inset nature of the roof. Here's another view...
And now a NEW photo shows the rip is not part of the corner damage. It goes higher, if anything, the rip may connect with the corner at some point but it is NOT ONLY the corner as conspiracy theorists suggest. Evidence is growing that there is more damage than even FEMA originally thought.
All this talk of the accuracy of the governments reports and my web site is to take the focus away from the accuracy of the conspiracy story...
"Just a few small fires..." Remember that?
Note the different cantilever core lower level where the fire was seen.
The below images are revered from the "gash" photos. They are taken from the north while the gash images are taken from the south. The "Kink" does not line up with the gash on the other side of the building, nor does it have to. It was the fires seen on the east side which are suspected of collapsing building 7 and not the gash. The gash only proves the building was heavily damaged by the north tower collapse. It's not unreasonable to conclude the gash begun the fires and made the building that much more unstable.