Why Is This Building Still Standing?

Beijing China. Fireworks start five-plus-hour blaze, destroy new high-rise:

From the Guardian:


A new 44-storey luxury hotel in downtown Beijing was today engulfed in a fire thought to have been caused by sparks from fireworks as the city celebrated China’s biggest holiday.

One onlooker, Li Jian, said he saw smoke rise from the hotel roof shortly after a huge burst of fireworks showered it with sparks. “Smoke came out for a little while, but then it just started burning,” Li said.
Crews put out much of the fire within three hours although smaller fires were still burning.

China View:

About 600 firemen, along with 85 fire engines, fought the blaze that started at 8:27 p.m. Monday and was put out at about 2 a.m. Tuesday. More than 600 people living in three residential buildings near the fire were relocated to 10 nearby hotels Monday night.

The day after:



“Blackened Hulk” – click to enlarge

fire_day_art_257_20090210053552.jpg
The fire-damaged TVCC building as seen on Tuesday (Photo by AP)

From
WSJ.com
:

The deadly fire that broke out in Beijing’s business district has apparently left the landmark $800 million square China Central Television Tower without serious damage. But the iconic structure and its fans have suffered a loss nevertheless.

The inferno– which CCTV has admitted was caused by a fireworks display arranged by one its own employees-– turned the 44-story Television Cultural Center into a blackened hulk. The boot-shaped building was an integral part of well-known Dutch architect Rem Koolhaas’s award-winning vision for the CCTV complex in the heart of Beijing’s Central Business District.

If the laws of physics are the same here, as they are there… then why hasn’t this building crumpled into a hole, floor by floor, leaving very little standing or identifiable, exploding outward into dust as it imploded, into its own basement, within 45 minutes of the beginning of the fire?

No offense intended. Just trying to understand the NIST report, that’s all. (So are these folks).

Liam

7 Comments

  1. I don’t know why it’s still standing, but it’s going to take some very difficult work by demolition experts to bring it down safely into its own footprint now, isn’t it?

  2. Well, I guess, under the Einstein addage, “It is important to never stop asking questions,” you have asked a good question, Liam!

    I just found a great quote by Aristotle:

    “It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.”

    So, I will entertain the thought that:

    a) The twin towers were rigged with fancy explosive charges to cause a collapse in the case of emergency;

    b) Shortly after 2 airplanes hit these towers up high, some important people deemed this a suitable emergency and hit the switch in (a).

    Hey, in this crazy mixed-up world, it ain’t the most bizarre thing I’ve ever entertained!

  3. Yeah… it’s a horrible question too.. I know you know what I mean. I hate asking it, in so many ways. I just can’t find a way out of the material – the suppressed firefighter testimony, and the ten hundred internal contradictions.

    It’s an awful story. I really go back and forth, honestly.

  4. I suggest you guys google” Loose change final cut” it’s a pretty well made 9/11 conspiracy film. Its the sequel to the blockbuster “Loose change.” You can see it for free.

  5. I haven’t seen any of the Loose Changes, but they’re criticized pretty harshly and I suspect that some of it at least might be justified. I had the impression that “Fabled Enemies” might be an interesting one since it seems to examine the political side more in detail. Also “ZERO : An Investigation Into 9/11” might be a good one, from a European perspective I suppose. But I haven’t seen any of it completely myself, so I’m not sure.

  6. The building is probably still standing because it has a cement core. And besides the fact that a 737 didnt smash thru 4-6 floors,doing damages to the floor supports.

    Since we don’t know whether or not this building has a cement core,i would think that the building in Madrid that burned for hours would be a better comparison.

    911 conspiracy folks like to use it as a comparison,i don’t know why,because if you look at photos of that building after the fire you would quickly discover that almost ALL the steel above the concrete reinforced section of the building had melt\ and collapsed.

    And those wtc didn’t really collapse into their own footprints because one of them collapsed all the way into the WTC 7 building,leaving a nearly 30 story gash thru the bottom corner of that building,and that building later collapsed into the direction of the damage.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *