• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Is this image

[qimg]http://algoxy.com/psych/images/wtc1spirecorewall.jpg[/qimg]

the interior?

Because the same site calls it a corner spire when viewed from another angle.

[qimg]http://algoxy.com/psych/images/wtccornerspireclose.gif[/qimg]

Which is it? Corner spire or interior core.

It is an interior box column. The interior box columns were attached but outside the concrete shear wall. This image shows it outside the core area.

site1074.jpg


Realize that no image shows the steel core columns per the OFFICIAL TOWER STRUCTURE that were supposed to be inside the core.
 
I cannot cite that but I have shown what they think they witnessed, a controlled demolition.

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

Please show where another steel building has collapsed.

Please show that the structure NIST depicts is correct by using raw images of the towers during the fall. I show that the NIST structure never appears.

http://algoxy.com/psych/images/southcorestands.gif
Forget the fact that you're completely wrong for a moment.

How does a concrete core support the controlled demolition theory?
 
I cannot cite that but I have shown what they think they witnessed, a controlled demolition.
Which is an anecdote and, therefore, not evidence

Please show where another steel building has collapsed.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1647154&postcount=4293
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1485306&postcount=25

Please show that the structure NIST depicts is correct by using raw images of the towers during the fall. I show that the NIST structure never appears.
Pictures are not evidence in, and of, themselves.
 
It is an interior box column. The interior box columns were attached but outside the concrete shear wall. This image shows it outside the core area.

Christophera, is it really possible to be both an interior box column and a corner spire?
 
A building not hit by a jet falls at free fall. WTC 7

Good. Now find one that had a fire burn for 7 hours without any firefighting efforts, and also had two of the three tallest buildings in the United States fall on top of them.

I'm waiting.
 
This appears as obfuscation. If you cannot support the tower structure NIST says existed, why not just say so.

I've shown that the core of the tower is concrete by default at the least, because you cannot show the steel core columns NIST calls for. They did not exist.

So are you trying to dimiss the information of the concrete core so that the NIST analysis is more credible?
I'm just trying to figure out why you're trying so hard to see a concrete core that isn't there. What does it mean to you if you're right? Does it somehow support a controlled demolition argument?
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
 
I can't follow this thread anymore without asking Christophera a few simple questions.

Are you saying that the WTC's were not constucted the way it is reported in the NIST report?

Are you saying that hijacked passenger planes were not the direct cause of the towers' collapse?

Do you plan on staying on this thread long enough to maybe convince someone that your theories are valid?

All simple questions that I would really appreciate you answering.

Thanks.
 
Christophera, look at these images and read carefully.

This image you just showed:

site1074.jpg


DOES NOT SHOW AN INTERIOR BOX COLUMN.

Look at this image and the distance that the WTC is from the building on the left:

WTC%20at%20Night.jpg



Please tell me that you can see that the image you showed shows the EXTERIOR of the WTC, not an interior box column. LOOK AT THE DISTANCES.

If this is the basis for you argument, you need to start over.
 
Christophera, are you saying this:

corewallspirearrows.gif


is part of the INTERIOR core?

Yes, that is a section of the concrete shear wall which WAS the concrete core. The steel is clearly flexing and the end of the broken concrete wall can be seen. Most importantly, no steel core columns are seen insied the core and they would dominate that image IF they existed, they did not.

This is the face of the wall where interior box columns are sihouetted against the concrete wall.

shearspirewall.jpg
 
I will follow this thread until Christophera answers a few simple questions.

Are you saying that the WTC's were not constucted the way it is reported in the NIST report?

Are you saying that hijacked passenger planes were not the direct cause of the towers' collapse?

Do you plan on staying on this thread long enough to maybe convince someone that your theories are valid?

All simple questions that I would really appreciate you answering.

Thanks.
 
This picture

http://kiewit.oregonstate.edu/images/wtc_sunrise.jpg

allows a fairly clear view through the WTC at sunrise. There's no single core that runs the length of the building.

(It's also very pretty.)

I explain that photo and the other here,

http://concretecore.741.com/

The Concrete Core And Its Hallways

Below on the left is WTC 1 at sunrise. The view is not looking down the hallways, we look nearly along the long axis of the towers core. The vertical line of light in the lower segment is created by sunlight reflecting off the inner core walls then shining out the core hallway.

The North Tower had a core oriented east and west. The camera perspective is not aligned with the hallway as can be seen by the orientation of the south towers roof indicating an oblique view. The light is reflected off the inner south shear wall at a hallway level where there is no doorway interrupting. Notice the very slight interruptions, dark streaks, whole dark floors. The nature of light under these conditions is to blend, blur and obscure solid areas between the light.

We see no light on the left side because the doorways on the north face do not align with the doors on the east. Above that, or the top sky lobby floor, the top floors had a different scheme with some halls on one floor crossing both directions.



The core of the south tower above is oriented north south with its long axis and had 2 halls crossing the short axis. We see no light through it because the doors on our face only reveal a shadowed inner concrete wall corner. See the 2 vertical, central lines in the image below.

sf_gallery_04.jpg


Tower on right, the north tower. The interior box columns followed the slight taper of the concrete core to a point then had to continue vertically plumb to the roof as the interior wall of the outside tube of the steel framework. The purpose of this section and photo is to show the space between the interior box columns and the tapering core face at the upper floors. The north tower had hallways crossing perpendicularly every other floor. This picture of the towers is looking due south through the towers.

The north tower core was oriented east west, so we are looking at the wide side. On the right tower fr then project that dddistance down to a cross section. We see, from right to left; a light space from the out side to a dark column which represents the floor space to the interior box column, then there is another narrow light space left of that. That is the space between the interior box column and the concrete core face. Going leftward we see the facing concrete shear wall, then the hallway crossing the narrow axis, then the core face again, then the space between the east core face, then interior box column, then floor space to the east side of the building.
 
These are really easy questions,

Are you saying that the WTC's were not constucted the way it is reported in the NIST report?

Are you saying that hijacked passenger planes were not the direct cause of the towers' collapse?

Do you plan on staying on this thread long enough to maybe convince someone that your theories are valid?

All simple questions that I would really appreciate you answering.

Thanks.
 
These are really easy questions,

Are you saying that the WTC's were not constucted the way it is reported in the NIST report?

Absolutely. And all posting here have failed to support the FEMA structure that NIST uses.

Are you saying that hijacked passenger planes were not the direct cause of the towers' collapse?

Absolutely, the planes were a cover for the fact that the building were built to be demolished and scheduled for 9-11.

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

Do you plan on staying on this thread long enough to maybe convince someone that your theories are valid?

I've already shown that the official theory (lie) is invalid. The structure that NIST says was there cannot be supported by raw images.

All simple questions that I would really appreciate you answering.
Thanks.

It should be simple to support the towers that NIST states existed, but no one has provided one single image showing the steel core columns in the center of the core.
 
Absolutely, the planes were a cover for the fact that the building were built to be demolished and scheduled for 9-11.

This is the single, most ridiculous theory I have heard yet.

You think that individuals involved in the design of the WTC's designed them for the purpose of destroying them easier in the future?

Are you taking any prescription drugs? You should be.
 
Absolutely. And all posting here have failed to support the FEMA structure that NIST uses.

Wheras you have failed to establish anything for your hysterical claims.

Absolutely, the planes were a cover for the fact that the building were built to be demolished and scheduled for 9-11.

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

Utter nonsense and complete demonstrating a lack of knowledge of explosives.

I've already shown that the official theory (lie) is invalid. The structure that NIST says was there cannot be supported by raw images.

You have not done what you say.
 
Attention all passengers... We have just left the Twilight Zone and are rapidly passing the Outer Limits. Destination: Unknown!
 
Absolutely. And all posting here have failed to support the FEMA structure that NIST uses.

Absolutely, the planes were a cover for the fact that the building were built to be demolished and scheduled for 9-11.
http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html

I've already shown that the official theory (lie) is invalid. The structure that NIST says was there cannot be supported by raw images.

It should be simple to support the towers that NIST states existed, but no one has provided one single image showing the steel core columns in the center of the core.
Now we're getting to the crux of it:

Christophera's link said:
The only way to reconcile ab analysis inclusive of the 4 Glaring Inconsistencies is that the thick coatings of the rebar of the cast concrete support core and foundation were actually made of plastic explosive C4. This would put enough explosive force in direct contact with the most concrete at high enough pressures and enable the instantaneous structural collapse of each floor consecutively to the ground that we saw, as well as the resulting particulate. Attempting to apply explosives to the exterior of the concrete would have created too much external explosion and made the demo obvious without achieving a fraction of what we saw or see in the sand and gravel of the photos linked above.

The Notion of no concrete core and of cutting the supposed steel core columns with anything other than shape charges, not developed as they are today, would have changed the character of the event witnessed. Below is a diagram [ http://www.ribbands.co.uk/prdpages/C4.htm ]

This was technology invented in the cold war to make self destruct missile silos and submarine bases, perfect for preplanned demolition. The C4 protected the steel from corrosion before the sea water was evacuated by the incoming concrete into the forms. The C4 was encapsulated in the concrete and its 10 year average shelf life extended by many times.
(bolding mine)

edited to fix link
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom