Has Anyone Seen A Realistice Explanation For Free Fall Of The Towers?

[Manny]

The use of math is a waste of time (that is what you are trying to cause) and I've shown that the towers have a concrete core.

You've shown an interesting picture. How do you know from what that is contructed? There's no small amount of dust and smoke obscuring a full view.

I've even shown the 3" REBAR ON 4' CENTERS but it seems as no one here has any structural knowledge and just believe everything they are told.

I know enough to know that that's not what you think it is. It's a piece of the exterior of the building.

 

[kookbreaker]

I know enough to know that that's not what you think it is. It's a piece of the exterior of the building.

Is that what he's on about? I would have through that it being a piece of the exterior was painfully obvious. I was searching the pic for something else.

Geez.

 

[Christophera]

Correct. It is a waste of time.

Because the math shows that the collapse happened as we would predict.

So, yes, using math to prove your counter claim would be a waste, as it would not show what you claim.

But go on making claims without evidence.....

You have posted no evidence of any kind. I post evidence of the towers that stood and their concrete core. I even show the inner reinforcing bar of the concrete core as evidence and no counter evidence is provided.

By default, I have proven the concrete core. Meaning that the continued efforts to get the impossible, the exact fall time, are but subterfuge and you all are working together to cover the murders of 3000 Americans.

 

[Manny]

Timmy...

Tim =! Timothy. Hope that helps.

In other news, one of the people who helped design the NIST computer simluation was none other than the very structural engineer who built the towers, Les Robinson. I'm pretty confident that he's more knowledgable about the contstruction techniques than the BBC was two days after the attacks.



Edited to put the right Tim in.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

The NY mayor took all the plans.

http://www.nyclu.org/g_archive020602.html

and will not return them. The picture is an absolute. If you cannot use it, that is your problem.

No, the plans are the property of the Port Authority.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Still much to fast and there is no way the concrete core is going to fall like that. No one here has prived a single image of the core NIST says stood.

The inability to produce a raw image of the supposed core columns is underlined by the irrational insistence that the free fall rate must be determined exactly. I'm saying the concrete core is what enabled the fast fall rate and you have no raw evidence to counter that assertion.

Why is it too fast? Show your math.

PICTURES ARE NOT IN AN OF THEMSELVES EVIDENCE! Get this through your think, conspiratorial skull!

 

[Christophera]

I know enough to know that that's not what you think it is. It's a piece of the exterior of the building.

You can see through the 3" REBAR ON 4' CENTERS, how could it be the exterior?

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Those emergency professionals have witnessed controlled demolition and know what high explosive detonations sound like.

http://www.letsroll911.org/discussion_in_firehouse.mpg

Please cite where these professionals have prior experience with demolitions.

Come up with some evidence to support your assertions.

"Pot? Hello, this is kettle. You're black."

 

[Christophera]

No, the plans are the property of the Port Authority.

They were, and that was THE PEOPLES property, public information that was taken and the courts won't make the mayor return the information.

http://www.nyclu.org/g_archive020602.html

 

[Dave_46]

NIST uses the wrong basic structure and no raw images of the collapse to support the structure they describe.

Here is a page that uses only raw images and links to engineering sites to show the towers as they really stood.

http://concretecore.741.com/

When I clicked on that link I saw, briefly, before the window trying to scare me about a virus a drawing of a concrete COLUMN with steel reinforcing in it. The reinforcing was labelled steel BEAMS. If they can't get something as simple as that right I'm not going to bother to read the rest.

Dave

 

[The_Fire]

To make this interesting, I have just written the compagny which build the WTC, Tishman Construction Compagny, asking for, amongst other things, where the orginal blueprints can be obtained.

 

[Stellafane]

Hi Christophera. I'll give you credit for not simply posting links and running, and for keeping the discourse reasonably civil (although your recent responses to pgwenthold and Timothy may be indication that your veneer of civility is wearing a bit thin). But I must say your arguments thus far have been incredibly weak, even for CT'ers (and that's saying something). The main thrust of your postings seems to be "I don't agree with the standard 9/11 story, so it's wrong," with no supporting data or experience to back that up. When someone answers one of your questions or challenges a point, you simply dismiss their information, again with the "I don't believe it so it's not true" argument. That may work in some forums, but you'll never change anyone's mind here with those tactics. Ans until you offer a lot more than you have, I see no reason not to dismiss you as just another CT'er who for whatever reason decided 9/11 was an inside job, ignoring the vast preponderance of evidence to the contrary, and are now desperately searching among the stray pixels, shadows, and echoes for proof of your theory. And pixels, shadows, and echoes are all you'll ever have, since reality itself is so stacked against you.

 

[chipmunk stew]

FEMA said this core stood.

http://algoxy.com/psych/psyimages/femacore.gif

The BBC still thinks that this core stood.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1540000/images/_1540044_world_trade_structure300.gif

but there is nowhere for the elevators inside the core. So typically we catch a liar because their story doesn't match.

Ah, now we're getting somewhere. Thank you.

You don't suppose those overly-simplified illustrations intended for mass-consumption are significant, do you?

Here's what NIST really thinks about the construction of the towers:
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1-1A.pdf

Here's a detailed report on the steel NIST recovered from the towers, including structural members from the core: http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1-3BDraft.pdf

Using data gathered from the above and other supplemental documents, here's how NIST reconstructed the scenario (includes a lot of information on construction of core): http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1Draft.pdf

This is a picture of one of the towers mid-construction, showing the core columns (reduced version attached): http://www.terrorize.dk/911/images/wtc-1.construction.1.jpg

 

[kookbreaker]

You can see through the 3" REBAR ON 4' CENTERS, how could it be the exterior?

Its the exterior. Deal with it. You are seeing this, or seomthing similar to this:

http://www.evanzucker.com/remains of no. 2 world trade center.jpg

From the side.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Leave it to a supporter of the murderers of Americans to demand an exact answer which cannot be obtained.

You have no support for the towers NIST said stood. Meaning you are supporting a lie to protect the real murderers.

Are you familiar with the terms libel and slander? If not, get familiar as you are treading dangerously close.

n English and American law, and systems based on them, libel and slander are two forms of defamation (or defamation of character), the tort or delict of publishing (to a third party) a false statement that negatively affects someone's reputation.

"Defamation" is the general term used internationally, and is used in this article where it is not necessary to distinguish between "libel" and "slander". Libel is defamation that can be seen, such as in writing, printing, effigy, a movie, or a statue. Slander is any defamation that is spoken and heard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libel

 

[Abbyas]

You can see through the 3" REBAR ON 4' CENTERS, how could it be the exterior?

I know I'm late to the party, but could someone tell me where in the picture is the rebar? And then why it's supposed to be the interior?

 

[kookbreaker]

I know I'm late to the party, but could someone tell me where in the picture is the rebar? And then why it's supposed to be the interior?

Ummm, I think his evidence that it is is that he said it was.

 

[Timothy]

Timmy wants the impossible because all that is available is that the towers NIST says existed cannot be evidenced with raw information.

By doing so he supports the lies that the real murderers hide behind.

What about our rights and freedoms Timmy?

Let's see how many things are wrong in three sentences.

1. Using a diminutive of my name as an infantile tactic to try to belittle me. What should I call you now? Chrisofullofit? Christophaker?

2. I don't want the impossible. I ask for your meaning of "too fast", and you do nothing but evade.

3. "The Towers fell too fast, but I can't tell you how fast because I can't interpret some graphics that were in a report and the report is lying anyway."

4. "By doing so he supports the lies that the real murderers hide behind." I think this sums up Christophera's credibility nicely.

5. Rights and freedoms? Well, unfortunately, you still have the right and freedom to insult, make baseless accusations, and carry on like a moron.

- Timothy

 

[Christophera]

Please cite where these professionals have prior experience with demolitions.

"Pot? Hello, this is kettle. You're black."

They are emergency personnel in NY, that is enough to accept that there is reasonable doubt that it was a collapse. Particuarly when 2 towers fell identically with very different damages.

Here is the site that explains free fall.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html

The fire fighters know it was a demo because collapses don't pulverize everything.

http://www.letsroll911.org/discussion_in_firehouse.mpg

 

[dubfan]

To make this interesting, I have just written the compagny which build the WTC, Tishman Construction Compagny, asking for, amongst other things, where the orginal blueprints can be obtained.

Ooh! Ooh! I can answer that!

They were the property of the New York City Ports Authority, which, I believe, recently sold them to Louder Than Words (LTW) -- Dylan Avery's production company.

No lie.