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

[Christophera]

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.

My error. I don't care about format. Simple images of evidence are what I mean. This is raw evidence of high explosives detonating in maximum containment. Lots of dust from high pressures and material heaving with velocity for distances.

http://algoxy.com/psych/images/wtc1plumecascade.jpg

 

[Gravy]

Still running, Christophera?

I'm giving you the chance to prove you're not a fraud.

If I don't get that file in the next 5 minutes, that settles it, and you'd best take your show elsewhere.

 

[Christophera]

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?

No.

 

[Gravy]

Got it, fraud. What a pathetic person.

 

[westphalia]

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]

Christophera, have you ever seen any "raw" video footage of the collapse, or just these still "raw" images?

Do you like sushi BTW?

 

[treble_head]

My error. I don't care about format. Simple images of evidence are what I mean. This is raw evidence of high explosives detonating in maximum containment. Lots of dust from high pressures and material heaving with velocity for distances.

http://algoxy.com/psych/images/wtc1plumecascade.jpg

wow. you know nothing of how dust settles do you? especially when compressed by a falling object... If debris is falling quickly, (heavy) and dust and debris are falling slower (light), do you know what that means? It makes light objects fall slower and makes it look like they're falling at different speeds.

Do you know why? Because they are! It's called friction and gravity!!! Dust spreads rubble doesn't. Wanna know why? Gravity, wind, simple math...

dust spreads because lighter objects (i.e. the dust) flow faster in the air than heavier objects. It's not a detonation, It's f-ing physics!

 

[Regnad Kcin]

No.

Thank you.

Now then, at what level (that is, between what stories) did each airplane strike each tower?

 

[Shrinker]

Christophera call me stupid if you wish but I'm having trouble exactly picturing what you are describing inside the towers. From your diagram...

http://algoxy.com/psych/images/corehallsdoors.gif
That's a single solid concrete box on the inside of the core there? Spanning the entire width of the core? You also describe some extra supporting features near the corners of the towers.

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

Forgive me but I'm having trouble locating either of these notions in this photograph...

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehost/36174478028b77d6c.jpg

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

So you have been made to think that huh?

NIST is the one that has made outrageous claims. To think what we saw was a collapse is inane and utterly unacceptable. You believe them and I can show the structure they use for analysis is wrong. The core was concrete.

http://concretecore.com

Your turn to come up with evidence supporting the tower core you think stood. That is the place to start.

Actually, it is you and you alone who has to cough up the evidence, here.

Under the US legal system, the burden of proof lies with the accuser and you are accusing unspecified persons of crimes including; high treason, crimes against the constitution and roughly 3,000 counts of first degree murder.

Prove it or shut it.

 

[Shrinker]

Picture taken inside the WTC during construction. Is that steel columns on the right there there? No sign of a concrete core. Bit late to put one in too.

http://www.emporis.com/en/il/im/?id=197710

View from above during construction. No sign of a concrete core here either.

http://www.emporis.com/en/il/im/?id=197707

Or here:

http://www.emporis.com/en/il/im/?id=197704

And here you can see though the outer shell to, you guessed it, a steel core.

http://www.emporis.com/en/il/im/?id=197717

 

[Shrinker]

And the most damning of all, at your own site...

http://concretecore.741.com/images/silhouettenoontosouth.jpg

The picture shows a complete absence of a solid concrete core.

The babblings on that site seem to be offering some kind of explanation but it makes no sense at all. Are you saying the WTC was built without a core, then one was added secretly later? Since the building stood perfectly well without it, why add it? Why add it secretly? So it could leave a vaguely suspicious shadow 30 years later?

 

[Beleth]

From this web page.

1) The rate equaling that of free fall, inconsistent sequence, direction.
2) Total pulverization of everything but heavier steel
3) The molten steel seen in the basement 2 weeks after 9-11
4) The character and quantity of concrete particulate in the dust.


1) has been thoroughtly debunked. While ignoring exactly how the towers were designed. They do not explain free fall to the ground of the entire structure. They do not explain how this happened twice and why the impact/fall sequence is backwards, Why the wrong tower fell first if it was a collapse. They don't explain why the tops of the towers fell the wrong directions according top the sides damaged.



2) isn't backed up by any evidence I saw presented on that page unless high explosives centralized and distributed throughout cast concrete core would cause all that SAND & GRAVEL. Without identifying the correct design of the tower, the issue of pulverization cannot be analyzed.


3) has been debunked so many times over in the Loose Change thread that I have lost count. To the misfits trying to debunk, it is suffcient to simply announce it as "debunked" with no proof whatsoever. Of course they still can't show that the tower NIST analyzed was the actual structure that stood but I will confirm that they have pronounced a great deal that 9-11 theories have been "debunked" popular Mechanics" even did it. Notice, they didn't even mention the concrete core


4) has the same requirement that you selectively view the universe to avoid feeling like you know what is going on in it.refutation as 2) did.

1) Composition of the tower is irrelevant. You can't say both that something fell at free fall and that you don't know the time it took to fall.

2) remains unsupported by evidence provided on that Web page.

3) remains debunked, as Christophera tries to divert the issue from the molten aluminum back to the concrete core, which was somehow both destroyed to make the building collapse and remained standing after the building collapsed.

4) still same as 2) with the added note that Christophera is getting less coherent.

 

[Beleth]

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.

Compare and contrast:

Educators altered your mind,
You cannot think opposite of
what you were taught to think.
You have a cyclop perspective
and taught android mentality =
lobotomized analytical ability.
Educated singularity stupid -
You can't think 4 corner days.

 

[tim]

Timmy, you've been acting like a child demanding the impossible for awhile now. Are you supporting the lie that murderers hide behind or not? Because you cetinaly have not addressed the issue behind free fall, the structure of the core.

There were murders. And there are lies and it is being proven right here that you folks cannot supprt the NIST info on the towers structure. Meaning you are suporting a lie that murderes depend on to get away with their deeds.

Our governemnt has been infiltrated.

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

I am particularly annoyed by this comment, and have sent this person the following PM -

"I find this deeply offensive -
"Timmy, you've been acting like a child demanding the impossible for awhile now. Are you supporting the lie that murderers hide behind or not? Because you cetinaly (sic) have not addressed the issue behind free fall, the structure of the core.

There were murders. And there are lies and it is being proven right here that you folks cannot supprt (sic) the NIST info on the towers structure. Meaning you are suporting a lie that murderes (sic) depend on to get away with their deeds."

I am not involved in this discussion except as a moderator trying to keep a little calm. You accuse me of "Meaning you are suporting a lie that murderes (sic)depend on to get away with their deeds."
That is not only wrong, it is dishonourable. You should be deeply ashamed.
Tim"

Apart from anything else, it's not my government......

 

[bob_kark]

Oh, you're still going on about it... I had assumed you would have decided to turn away. I suppose I could ask you a few more questions that have been asked before that seem to disprove about everything you've claimed.

1. If you don't know how fast the WTC collapsed, how do you know it was "too fast?"

2. If the building is collapsing at free fall speed, why does the debris field overtake the collapse?

3. If there was a concrete core packed with C4, why is it still standing in your picture?

4. How would you time a collapse from a C4 demolition with a thermite demolition on the ground floor and have it look like a natural collapse?

5. If the Globalists, for lack of a better term, were so careful and thoughtful to plan the demolition of the WTC several decades in the past, why weren't they thoughtful enough to plant the thermite in the basement?

6. How are you able to claim that the structure as described in the NIST report is a sham if you never read the NIST report?

 

[Meffy]

Christophera, if you truly believe that crimes of this magnitude have been committed, it would be highly unethical of you not to report your "findings" to law enforcement officials, and to keep at it until justice is served. It seems to me that by not reporting them to appropriate authorities you have become an accessory to the crimes you're ranting about. Every minute you spend bothering us on this forum is another minute you have wasted while the perpetrators go free, laughing at you.

Oh, I know. You can't go to the authorities because "they're ALL in on the conspiracy," right? *patpat* Mmm-hm. Right.

[edited to correct an ill-chosen phrasing]

 

[westphalia]

5. If the Globalists, for lack of a better term, were so careful and thoughtful to plan the demolition of the WTC several decades in the past, why weren't they thoughtful enough to plant the thermite in the basement?

You're supposed to be telling us how you did it, Globalist Henchman 43.

And what about my application for membership? It's been almost a year now.

 

[Darat]

To anyone wishing to use in-line images in their posts please check Rule 4 of your Membership Agreement. I've edited quite a few posts in this thread that I believe breached Rule 4 and I have not so far issued any warnings regarding those breaches however if Members continue to breach Rule 4 I will start to issues warnings which could lead to further action being taken including suspension or banning.

If you are unsure whether an image is copyrighted and/or not available for general use or whether a particular site does explicitly allow hotlinking^WP then I suggest you play safe and merely include a link to the image you wish to draw Members' attention to.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat

 

[bob_kark]

You're supposed to be telling us how you did it, Globalist Henchman 43.

And what about my application for membership? It's been almost a year now.

Ugh... You submitted an application? How do you expect to be approved?