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

[Regnad Kcin]

Read it here,

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html#anchor1207667

Thank you. I read a bit, looking for what you say it contains: the reason why the "impact/fall sequence is backwards." Here's all I can locate:

"The fact that both towers fell almost identically and the tops fell in the wrong directions relating to the faces they were struck on are major factors that indicate the controlling aspects of the towers fall was completely separate from plane collisions and fires and that they were a demolition, controlled by timers.

Viewed from the east, here is the top of the north tower falling to the south when the tower was hit hard on the north side. Damage there logically causes a failure there having the tower fall to the north.

In addition to the above, it is completely illogical that this building, hit first, hit hardest, burnt worst, would fall last, without demolition's being involved." (Bolding mine.)

I'll not ask you to support your claims regarding "hit hardest, burnt worst [sic]" at the moment, Mr. Brown. I just want to be sure I understand you. So, for clarity's sake, let me make a list covering all the reasons you say "it is completely illogical that this building [the north tower]...would fall last."

• The north tower was hit first (undisputed)
• The north tower was hit hardest
• The north tower burnt worse

Have I left anything out? Is there anything you'd like to add?

 

[Christophera]

2001-1969= 32 years

ETA: I'm saying no organisation can have a specific plan that spans that long in history.

Our populatons have been dumbed down, made ignorant of how information is made stable in time in the human mind, perpetuated. We do not know everything about the mind.

 

[Pardalis]

Our populatons have been dumbed down, made ignorant of how information is made stable in time in the human mind, perpetuated. We do not know everything about the mind.

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

I know something about your mind, YOU'RE NUTS.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Incidentally, Mr. Brown, is this you?

 

[Christophera]

Do you deny that steel becomes softer as temperature is increased?

You have just achieved the dumbed down discovery award. That is why the core lie exists. Steel does that, but not nearly enough to cause what happened if it had a steel core, which it did not. It was concrete.

Now, if someone would just post one image of the structure NIST states existed, you all wouldn't be so guilty of disinformation.

 

[Christophera]

How does a concrete core support the controlled demolition theory?

Concrete can be fractured to fall instantly by a small amount of explosives that are located centrally.

 

[Christophera]

Incidentally, Mr. Brown, is this you?

Not me.

 

[Gravy]

Christophera, I checked my email and that RAW image file isn't there. Since you're online now, please send now. itmatters@mail.com

 

[Christophera]

Christophera, is it really possible to be both an interior box column and a corner spire?

Absolutely. There was an interior box column on each face very near the corner. They geometrically matched the truncation of the tower corners.

The towers were not built with a "corner spire". The lattice plane of interior box columns and floor beams, with some shear wall bracing it near the top, could be demolished in a way, intentionally or inadvertantly, to leave one corner interior box column stand exactly as we see.

 

[Gravy]

Did you send the image, Chrstophera?

 

[Timothy]

Your disinfo secret murder supporting buddies got this place so trashed with the spam, I have not even seen your question Timmy.

Well that settles it. You're a liar.

You've seen my question "HOW FAST DID THEY FALL?" several times. If you didn't see it, why did you respond to, and evade it here?

Well tim, the end of the fall is vague, so there you have it. The exact time is just not worth discussing. It appears you would rather know that than exactly how the fall rate was created.

And respond to, and evade it here?

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

Your delusional fantasies about being the focus of a Chumash Medicine people conspiracy have dulled your senses. You can't even get my name right after being corrected several times.

You're a fool, a stooge, a farce, a joke. And a liar.

Get professional mental health help.

- Timothy

 

[Christophera]

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.

No, I have provided the only realistic and feasible explantion for rates of fall near free fall and the total pulverization of the contents of the tower.

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

No one has ever produced a single image, raw evidence, of a steel core column. We start there. Back up what you believe stood. C'mon!

 

[Gravy]

I don't know, Timothy. It could be he is insane, but not a liar.

 

[Gravy]

No, I have provided the only realistic and feasible explantion for rates of fall near free fall and the total pulverization of the contents of the tower.

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

No one has ever produced a single image, raw evidence, of a steel core column. We start there. Back up what you believe stood. C'mon!

Christophera, where's that RAW image?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1665419&postcount=398
Please send it now, or explain why you are unable to.

 

[Christophera]

http://concretecore.741.com

This is your web site?

It is.

 

[Gravy]

Why haven't you sent the image, Christophera? It only takes a minute to do.
itmatters@mail.com

 

[Pardalis]

What's a "raw" image anyways?

 

[Gravy]

What's a "raw" image anyways?

I'm waiting to see if Christophera knows what the RAW format is. He's been demanding raw images from us again and again. We'll see if he's been using raw images.

 

[Christophera]

Okay, but you aren't the only one with experience with those materials,

Plus, as you stated on your web site, it's Concrete Reinfoced by steel. It's reasonable to believe the a structure standing temporarily during the collapse would behave like concrete instead of steel, giving the shape you claim is only concrete.

Have you ever examined the reinforcing grid and form system for a concrete wall, cast in place?

Do you know how flexible steel is when in long pieces, even when trussed heavily? The proportions of the towers made them unstable made with all steel. The steel reinforced concrete tube made a wonderful partnering of materials. The steel had fantastic load bearing capacity but would deform with weight. Also winds and weight together can really move it around. Deformations of the shear planes occur and failures happen. The concrete core takes a lot of lateral loads from the steel, torsion, deformations. The concrete keeps the steel aligned in it's maximum loadbearing form. The concrete tube is relatively light considering the performance in stiffining the tower.

Why do ya' think the new tower has a concrete core, cause the old one worked so good. We have been scammed, our nation hijacked.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Not me.

Fine.

Now will you go back and respond to my post #421?