Fellow Nigerians, as a Civil engineering graduate, i would love to give you a detailed explanation why the building collapse wasn't caused by an explosion.

During the stages of a building design, as a civil engineering student, i was taught the use of critical columns in my design. The critical columns is suppose to hold a build when an unexpected disaster affects the sides of a building e.g Flood, earth quake. In the design, the critical columns are suppose to carry the total building weight (dead load and imposed load) even when neglecting the presence of other columns i.e in theory they can hold up a building without other support structure like the walls. In most designs walls are classified as dead load other than a support for the building.

The video released by the church shows on side of the structure failed and resulted to multiple column failures. In a well designed structure if a failure occurs on one side of a building, the critical columns would prevent the other sides from falling and hold up other parts of the building. This is a safety measure that is in practice for years and every qualified engineer knows this.

Below is an example, That building was bombed in Oklahoma city, Oklahoma USA by Timothy McVeigh on April 19, 1995. The critical columns were able to hold up the rest of the building and minimal damage was caused. Compare that too the synagogue building.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing

At this point you don't need to be a demolition expert or a civil engineer to know its a design flaw.
Now the questions we should be asking is,
1. Who designed the building
2. Why did the state approve the design.
3. Who decided to build a bad design.

I think all three groups need to questioned.

Thanks.

Icemann.

B Sc. Civil Engineering F.U.T Owerri.







[b] DISCLAIMER [/b]r.
Above is my personal analysis of the tragedy. Any use without the permission of the Author is a violation of the copyright laws. Thanks.

The only evidence you have for drawing your conclusion was that the building collapse started from one end?

I don't think that is enough reason to conclude that the building was without its critical columns.

I have seen controlled demolitions that started with one side of a building caving in first.

I would suggest, if you are able, to go to the site and do a proper investigation on why the building collapsed.

striktlymi: The only evidence you have for drawing your conclusion was that the building collapse started from one end?

I don't think that is enough reason to conclude that the building was without its critical columns.

I have seen controlled demolitions that started with one side of a building caving in first.

I would suggest, if you are able, to go to the site and do a proper investigation on why the building collapsed.

You need to read my post again.
In controlled demolition the critical column are attached to explosives. If you don't destroy the critical columns you would have a partial demolition. You need to go on YouTube and watch videos.


I don't need to go there to know what happened.
Your defence lack logic and you are not technical enough for me to have a constructive argument you.

Please call a structural engineer and ask for better clarification.

icemann:

You need to read my post again.
In controlled demolition the critical column are attached to explosives. If you don't destroy the critical columns you would have a partial demolition. You need to go on YouTube and watch videos.


I don't need to go there to know what happened.
Your defence lack logic and you are not technical enough for me to have a constructive argument you.

Please call a structural engineer and ask for better clarification.

I think you are the one who needs to watch those videos. Your 'evidence' does not support your conclusion.

Real Engineers don't just sit with a computer to investigate what happened.

You should also be intelligent to answer the following questions:

1. What was the mission the strange fighter jet that flew low over the said building four times before its collapse.?

2. Was the fighter jet authorised for that flying trip?

3.How are you so sure that such critical columns were not in place in the first instance.

As a learned person bereft of adequate information from afar, you should learn to be patient before rushing into a conclusion in a sensitive matter such as this.

You need to understand my point. I am not ruling out the fact a bomb was used i am saying the design was bad. The Oklahoma building was bombed and parts of it stood. If the synagogue was designed and built right it would have a similar aftermath.

It's clearly not the pastor's fault, the engineers should be held responsible.

icemann:
You need to understand my point. I am not ruling out the fact a bomb was used i am saying the design was bad. The Oklahoma building was bombed and parts of it stood. If the synagogue was designed and built right it would have a similar aftermath.

It's clearly not the pastor's fault, the engineers should be held responsible.

So, how sure are you that the building has no critical columns?
Have you been to the site?
What if the explosive were attached to the critical columns?
I think striktlymi is right
"a qualified engineer will not sit by his pc and assume without visiting the site for investigation.

Smooyis:
You should also be intelligent to answer the following questions:

1. What was the mission the strange fighter jet that flew low over the said building four times before its collapse.?

2. Was the fighter jet authorised for that flying trip?

3.How are you so sure that such critical columns were not in place in the first instance.

As a learned person bereft of adequate information from afar, you should learn to be patient before rushing into a conclusion in a sensitive matter such as this.

As a brainwashed religiotard, You should answer the following questions.
1. How did you conclude that the so-called plane was a fighter jet?
2. Are you aware of the average speed of a fighter jet, or the minimum speed it has to fly before it stalls and plunges to the ground?

3. Are you aware of the minimum altitude a fighter has to fly before it either has to land or it would lose it's lift , it's aerodynamic ability, stall and crash?

4. Are you aware of the height and the total circumference of a six storey building? And can you compare that to the answer of questions 2 and 3?

5. Are you aware, or have you considered that it would take about 1/10th of a second for a fighter jet or any other plane for that matter, to zoom past the length of that building flying at it's minimum speed?

6. Has it occurred to you numbskulls that a six storey building is not the equivalent of a sky scrapper?

7. Has it occurred to you that a plane, any plane flying across a residential area at such a very low altitude as suggested by you numbskulls would have shattered glass windows, caused mass panic, pictures would have been taken, and that such a plane would have most probably have crashed into the neighborhood?

8. Have you unthinking zombies ever considered that it is not possible for a fixed wing propelled aircraft to hover over a six storey building in an area full of hundreds of buildings?

9. Has it ever occurred to you that the video in question might be a fake Photoshoped?

10. And the most important of all, have you heard of something called PERSPECTIVE in photography? I betting that you have not, though you experience it every single.

Let me try to explain. When, for example, you take a video of a flying aircraft with a tall building in the foreground, you cannot with the naked eye tell the distance of the aircraft from the building because due to a lack of PERSPECTIVE, the aircraft would appear to the brain AS IF it was right on top of the building.
This is the case with this fraudulent video. It lacks visual PERSPECTIVE.
But, the good news is that it has TIME PERSPECTIVE. From the Time Perspective, we can see that the aircraft was at a great aerial distance from the building, that was why a camera could have captured and recorded it as it flew over the skies.
I repeat, anyone with common sense should know that a plane, a fighter jet as alleged, cannot hover over a 150 storey building in crowded city landscape, talkless of a 6 storey building.

It is only amongst religiotards that critical thinking is easily sacrificed in favour of blind beliefs.

^^^
Again, let's play blind belief, and assume for the sake of this argument that a strange plane defied the laws of aerodynamics and hovered over a six storey building for a length of time.
OK. Then so what?
We still have to invoke more magic to explain how it caused the building to collapse.
1. Did the plane drop a bomb into the building?
Invisible bomb, perhaps? An invisible bomb that does not produce fireballs and smoke when it detonates?

2. Did the plane spray chemicals on top of the building that penetrated into the concrete a d steel columns, melted them and caused the collapse?

3. Did the plane use a ray gun, pulse weapon or some other exotic star wars weapon to bring down the building?

4. If a plane did indeed fly by and cause the building to completely collapse, Does it say much about the plane OR much about the building that collapsed?
( Is common sense dead in Nigeria? )

5. Was the plane flown by a demon pilot that cast demonic spells on the building as it hovered over it?
Though this last one might seem the most plausible and appealing to striktlimy and his fellow religiotards, it would tend to question the ability of T.B clown Joshua's own invisible skydaddy to protect his prophet and followers.

More examples of visual perspectives.

In these cases, the objects are actually much more further apart the pictures would suggest.

I hope you get the idea an image, a video image pointed to the sky , can be misleading if perspective is not taken into consideration.

Controlled demolition is a phrase used by many here to describe the collapse of TB Joshua's guest house, yet most of the people who actually believe that it was a controlled demolition that brought the house down do not know what it takes to get it right.

First of all, explosives of the right charge would have to be placed at the right columns at the right height and rigged to explode in the right order for a controlled demolition to be archived. It is a very delicate operation that requires a high degree of precision akin to a surgeon's scalpel in contrast to a butcher's knife . And to get all of these conditions right is no random fluke, it requires planning, a technical understanding of structures and a very good knowledge of handling explosives.
It is not as easy as just throwing some dynamite into a building for it to collapse, otherwise people would not go to school to specialise in the demolition of structures.
My point is that planting a bomb in a building would most likely result in visible explosion with lots of fire amidst the ruins, but nothing like that was observed other than cement dust.
The other point of note is that if indeed there was actually an explosion, there is bound to be some residue which won't be too hard to find and analyse. So far, nothing on that front.

My third point is that the collapse of the building is consistent with how a concrete structure is expected to fail under compressive forces. I will do my best to explain this part.
There are two primary forces acting on structures; the first one is compressive (pushing together forces) and the second force is tension (pulling apart forces).
Concrete as a building material is very good for carrying the compressive load imposed by a building but quite poor when under tension, that is why steel reinforcement bars are place in the regions of the concrete that are in tension as steel is very very strong under tension but totally useless in compression.
So when designing a structure, the engineer will have to make sure that there is more than enough steel reinforcement to withstand the tensile force of the structure and more than enough concrete to carry the compressive force as well. The extra steel and concrete is the margin of safety and it is measured as a percentage of the designed load.
The margin of safety for concrete is usually higher than that of steel, because every structural engineer knows that the only thing worse than to have your structure fail, is to have it fail under compression. The reason for this is that a failure under tension is gradual, with enough time to decide whether to repair or evacuate the building. But a compressive failure is sudden and explosive, it results in a catastrophic failure. That was what I saw from the video.

striktlymi:
The only evidence you have for drawing your conclusion was that the building collapse started from one end?

I don't think that is enough reason to conclude that the building was without its critical columns.

I have seen controlled demolitions that started with one side of a building caving in first.

I would suggest, if you are able, to go to the site and do a proper investigation on why the building collapsed.

Common sense questions for you sir.

1. What is the major cause (or causes) of building collapses in Nigeria ?

2. Was the Synagogue building originally started as a 2 storey building or 6 storey building?

3. Did the builder request and got from building inspectors to add additional floors?


4. Again, tasking your common sense(?), what do you think happens or is likely to happen when you erect a 6 storey structure on a 2 storey foundation ?

I am soooooo ashamed of you.

I wish I could hold you responsible for the deaths of those 115 people.

dorox:
Controlled demolition is a phrase used by many here to describe the collapse of TB Joshua's guest house, yet most of the people who actually believe that it was a controlled demolition that brought the house down do not know what it takes to get it right.

First of all, explosives of the right charge would have to be placed at the right columns at the right height and rigged to explode in the right order for a controlled demolition to be archived. It is a very delicate operation that requires a high degree of precision akin to a surgeon's scalpel in contrast to a butcher's knife . And to get all of these conditions right is no random fluke, it requires planning, a technical understanding of structures and a very good knowledge of handling explosives.
It is not as easy as just throwing some dynamite into a building for it to collapse, otherwise people would not go to school to specialise in the demolition of structures.
My point is that planting a bomb in a building would most likely result in visible explosion with lots of fire amidst the ruins, but nothing like that was observed other than cement dust.
The other point of note is that if indeed there was actually an explosion, there is bound to be some residue which won't be too hard to find and analyse. So far, nothing on that front.

My third point is that the collapse of the building is consistent with how a concrete structure is expected to fail under compressive forces. I will do my best to explain this part.
There are two primary forces acting on structures; the first one is compressive (pushing together forces) and the second force is tension (pulling apart forces).
Concrete as a building material is very good for carrying the compressive load imposed by a building but quite poor when under tension, that is why steel reinforcement bars are place in the regions of the concrete that are in tension as steel is very very strong under tension but totally useless in compression.
So when designing a structure, the engineer will have to make sure that there is more than enough steel reinforcement to withstand the tensile force of the structure and more than enough concrete to carry the compressive force as well. The extra steel and concrete is the margin of safety and it is measured as a percentage of the designed load.
The margin of safety for concrete is usually higher than that of steel, because every structural engineer knows that the only thing worse than to have your structure fail, is to have it fail under compression. The reason for this is that a failure under tension is gradual, with enough time to decide whether to repair or evacuate the building. But a compressive failure is sudden and explosive, it results in a catastrophic failure. That was what I saw from the video.

Bros,
I am shocked at how heartless and insensitive striktlimy and the rest of these people are.
Their only concern is to miraculously absolve T clown Joshua of responsibility of the deaths of 115 people.
115 people!
115 people!

It is unbelievable.

plaetton:


Bros,
I am shocked at how heartless and insensitive striktlimy and the rest of these people are.
Their only concern is to miraculously absolve T clown Joshua of responsibility of the deaths of 115 people.
115 people!
115 people!

It is unbelievable.

I am shocked and saddened as well that even when the cause of a disaster is so obvious, many Nigerians would rather go after phantom causes because the alternative would force them to ask some unpleasant questions.

plaetton:


Common sense questions for you sir.

1. What is the major cause (or causes) of building collapses in Nigeria ?

2. Was the Synagogue building originally started as a 2 storey building or 6 storey building?

3. Did the builder request and got from building inspectors to add additional floors?


4. Again, tasking your common sense(?), what do you think happens or is likely to happen when you erect a 6 storey structure on a 2 storey foundation ?

I am soooooo ashamed of you.

I wish I could hold you responsible for the deaths of those 115 people.

A response that is appropriate for your silly questions...

1) It is uncommon for buildings less than ten years old to collapse in Nigerian. This is the first I have seen or heard of.

2) Go ask those who approved the plan to show you the requisite evidence of approval.

3) Until you verify question 2) this question is very silly.

4) Another silly question. What shred of evidence, apart from 'dem say', do you have to prove the foundation is not appropriate for the number of floors the building had?

I don't bloody care who is proud or ashamed of me and I bloody don't need you to b proud of me.

plaetton:


Bros,
I am shocked at how heartless and insensitive striktlimy and the rest of these people are.
Their only concern is to miraculously absolve T clown Joshua of responsibility of the deaths of 115 people.
115 people!
115 people!

It is unbelievable.

You can appeal to emotions all you want, I don't give a rat's bottom.

striktlymi:


You can appeal to emotions all you want, I don't give a rat's bottom.

You can't be much of a Christ-like "christian" if the tragic loss of over a hundred lives doesn't not "appeal to your emotion". You must be one of those who go to church only for the sake of reaping a bountiful harvest from their "seeds", while holiness and piety and empathy and love means absolutely nothing to them. Any wonder why Nigeria is the most corrupt, rotten cesspit on the planet despite being the most religious country on earth?

striktlymi:


A response that is appropriate for your silly questions...

1) It is uncommon for buildings less than ten years old to collapse in Nigerian. This is the first I have seen or heard of.

2) Go ask those who approved the plan to show you the requisite evidence of approval.

3) Until you verify question 2) this question is very silly.

4) Another silly question. What shred of evidence, apart from 'dem say', do you have to prove the foundation is not appropriate for the number of floors the building had?

I don't bloody care who is proud or ashamed of me and I bloody don't need you to b proud of me.

Re: question #2.
So you are going on record to state categorically that the building had approval for 6 floors?
Is that right sir?

Almost all instances of collapsed buildings in Lagos have been buildings under construction or newly constructed. You must be blind and deaf.

If structuctral defects are determined to be responsible for these deaths of 115 people, would you professionally challenge the findings or would you commit suicide out of shame?

Obi1kenobi:

You can't be much of a Christ-like "christian" if the tragic loss of over a hundred lives doesn't not "appeal to your emotion". You must be one of those who go to church only for the sake of reaping a bountiful harvest from their "seeds", while holiness and piety and empathy and love means absolutely nothing to them. Any wonder why Nigeria is the most corrupt, rotten cesspit on the planet despite being the most religious country on earth?

Thank you jare.
Imagine him calling me emotional. What else should I be when 115people are killed because of the irrationality, the hautiness, the arrogance of a pulpit love-vendor and his band of followers?

plaetton:


Re: question #2.
So you are going on record to state categorically that the building had approval for 6 floors?
Is that right sir?

Almost all instances of collapsed buildings in Lagos have been buildings under construction or newly constructed. You must be blind and deaf.

If structuctral defects are determined to be responsible for these deaths of 115 people, would you professionally challenge the findings or would you commit suicide out of shame?

Almost all instances of building collapse? Now I know you are almost choking on your emotions.

All the collapsed buildings I have read about were either from the Jakande era or old and dilapidated.

Guy you are an emotionat wreck. Do find somewhere to sit down, lest you fall.

If this were a civilized country, T.B Joshua would be a ruined man. Ruined. Even if he escaped criminal conviction, he'd certainly lose a civil law suit and would be sued for every penny he's worth. His more intelligent followers would also abandon the fraud. But fortunately for him, this is not a civilized country. He'll get off free after a long, tedious pointless investigation, to continue fleecing his loyal sheep.

@striktlymi, what is your opinion on the cause of the collapse? I would like to know if you think the aircraft has something to do with it or if the collapse was as a result of structural failure.

striktlymi:



Almost all instances of building collapse? Now I know you are almost choking on your emotions.

All the collapsed buildings I have read about were either from the Jakande era or old and dilapidated.

Guy you are an emotionat wreck. Do find somewhere to sit down, lest you fall.

Of course I am an emotional wreck.
115 people died for the st.u.pi.d cause of a charlatan, an uneducated charlatan, and no one is being held accountable.
I am an emotional wreck because people like you have mortgaged your humanity in defence of stone age superstitions and the con men that peddle them for profit.

I am an emotional wreck because a con man who dropped out of secondary school, the equivalent of 7th grade, is leading supposedly educated persons like to you to perdition and disgrace.

And yes, I am an emotional wreck because I am seeing people that I used to respect here on NL fuse their mouths deep into the bottom hole of a clown and charlatan who could not withstand the mental rigors of a grade seven education.

It is too bad you have no emotions left in you.
Poor you.

For those still on the controlled demolition skit. You do know exactly how it is done right? You are not just talking because you watched documentaries on 9/11. It requires several deliberate weakening of pivotal structures within the building and placement of explosives Times to go of systematically.

Now ask yourself.. is this what happened?

striktlymi:


A response that is appropriate for your silly questions...

1) It is uncommon for buildings less than ten years old to collapse in Nigerian. This is the first I have seen or heard of.

2) Go ask those who approved the plan to show you the requisite evidence of approval.

3) Until you verify question 2) this question is very silly.

4) Another silly question. What shred of evidence, apart from 'dem say', do you have to prove the foundation is not appropriate for the number of floors the building had?

I don't bloody care who is proud or ashamed of me and I bloody don't need you to b proud of me.

Coming from a Christian this is grossly hypocritical
But then it's nt new for a Christian to hide in the face of lies and hypocrisy to please his pastor and god

plaetton:


As a brainwashed religiotard, You should answer the following questions.
1. How did you conclude that the so-called plane was a fighter jet?
2. Are you aware of the average speed of a fighter jet, or the minimum speed it has to fly before it stalls and plunges to the ground?

3. Are you aware of the minimum altitude a fighter has to fly before it either has to land or it would lose it's lift , it's aerodynamic ability, stall and crash?

4. Are you aware of the height and the total circumference of a six storey building? And can you compare that to the answer of questions 2 and 3?

5. Are you aware, or have you considered that it would take about 1/10th of a second for a fighter jet or any other plane for that matter, to zoom past the length of that building flying at it's minimum speed?

6. Has it occurred to you numbskulls that a six storey building is not the equivalent of a sky scrapper?

7. Has it occurred to you that a plane, any plane flying across a residential area at such a very low altitude as suggested by you numbskulls would have shattered glass windows, caused mass panic, pictures would have been taken, and that such a plane would have most probably have crashed into the neighborhood?

8. Have you unthinking zombies ever considered that it is not possible for a fixed wing propelled aircraft to hover over a six storey building in an area full of hundreds of buildings?

9. Has it ever occurred to you that the video in question might be a fake Photoshoped?

10. And the most important of all, have you heard of something called PERSPECTIVE in photography? I betting that you have not, though you experience it every single.

Let me try to explain. When, for example, you take a video of a flying aircraft with a tall building in the foreground, you cannot with the naked eye tell the distance of the aircraft from the building because due to a lack of PERSPECTIVE, the aircraft would appear to the brain AS IF it was right on top of the building.
This is the case with this fraudulent video. It lacks visual PERSPECTIVE.
But, the good news is that it has TIME PERSPECTIVE. From the Time Perspective, we can see that the aircraft was at a great aerial distance from the building, that was why a camera could have captured and recorded it as it flew over the skies.
I repeat, anyone with common sense should know that a plane, a fighter jet as alleged, cannot hover over a 150 storey building in crowded city landscape, talkless of a 6 storey building.

It is only amongst religiotards that critical thinking is easily sacrificed in favour of blind beliefs.

Brainwashed, religiotards, unthinking zombies, numbskulls or whatever you may call us cannot change the truth. It will always prevail against falsehood. I pray we will all be alive when truth is revealed for all to see. The prophet has said it repeatedly that God will get back at the evil perpetrators, and we will all know when this happens. Again, i advise you for the umpteenth time to stop drawing hasty conclusions as you have been doing in your write-ups. Let the security and the panel set up to investigate this matter do their job. Thanks

macof:


Coming from a Christian this is grossly hypocritical
But then it's nt new for a Christian to hide in the face of lies and hypocrisy to please his pastor and god

Olodo

Obi1kenobi:

You can't be much of a Christ-like "christian" if the tragic loss of over a hundred lives doesn't not "appeal to your emotion". You must be one of those who go to church only for the sake of reaping a bountiful harvest from their "seeds", while holiness and piety and empathy and love means absolutely nothing to them. Any wonder why Nigeria is the most corrupt, rotten cesspit on the planet despite being the most religious country on earth?

I am surprised that at this age we have adults who don't know what it means to appeal to emotion.

plaetton:


Of course I am an emotional wreck.
115 people died for the st.u.pi.d cause of a charlatan, an uneducated charlatan, and no one is being held accountable.
I am an emotional wreck because people like you have mortgaged your humanity in defence of stone age superstitions and the con men that peddle them for profit.

I am an emotional wreck because a con man who dropped out of secondary school, the equivalent of 7th grade, is leading supposedly educated persons like to you to perdition and disgrace.

And yes, I am an emotional wreck because I am seeing people that I used to respect here on NL fuse their mouths deep into the bottom hole of a clown and charlatan who could not withstand the mental rigors of a grade seven education.

It is too bad you have no emotions left in you.
Poor you.

Guy come back when u have something reasonable to say.

Like I said, I don't give a rat's bottom at your silly appeal to emotions.

dorox:
@striktlymi, what is your opinion on the cause of the collapse? I would like to know if you think the aircraft has something to do with it or if the collapse was as a result of structural failure.

For now, I am yet to form an opinion on the cause of the collapse because I am yet to get the facts of the matter.

All we have for now are claims and counter claims. The flight pattern of the aircraft seem a bit odd but that does not prove it's presence has anything to do with the collapse.

The facts we have for now are that the building collapsed and people are dead. I believe firmly that at least one person is responsible but for now I have no evidence to say who.

striktlymi:



Almost all instances of building collapse? Now I know you are almost choking on your emotions.

All the collapsed buildings I have read about were either from the Jakande era or old and dilapidated.

Guy you are an emotionat wreck. Do find somewhere to sit down, lest you fall.

LOL lwkmd

Never knew strikty was this witty,

@OP dunno while people so keenly wish tb joshua was responsible for the buildung collapse, even when it has not be proven that he didn't have approval to add aditional floors to the 2 floors.

striktlymi:


I am surprised that at this age we have adults who don't know what it means to appeal to emotion.

Not really. It's meaning is very clear, though you're obviously deluded enough to assume you understand it better than others because you've seen a listing of logical fallacies. Your callous apathy towards a horrifying tragedy, all in a bid to defend your master, seems at odds with the teachings of Christ. Except one is a sociopath, the death of over a hundred persons in such circumstances must certainly register on an emotional level. So some people "appeal to your emotion" cos it doesn't seem the gravity of the situation registers with some of you sheeple.

Oh, and other than the "appeal to emotion", your points have already been destroyed logicallyby my good friend above.