• 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.
Christophera said:
How do they feel about the sytem you are supporting?
Click to expand...
You're making yet another baseless assumption / accusation. I've not said a word concerning what "system I support." I have demanded that you back up your claims with credible evidence. You have failed.

Goodbye.
 
Mercutio said:
As a pie person above all else, I am compelled to request that you find out the recipe. Ask your host, or the restaurant, or take somebody hostage, but dammit, we are talking pie here...(seriously, if you find it, PM me...)
Click to expand...
I wish I could give you something with measurements and all. My wife made it, and when I asked her, she said she just made it up as she went along. She just cooked up the strawberry & rhubarb with some sugar and a little water until it was mushy, set it aside to cool, lined some tart tins with pre-made pie crust dough (Pillsbury or something) and pre-cooked the crusts, then filled the tarts with the strawberry mixture blended with a bit of quick-cooking tapioca powder, and cooked it until it set. She served it warm topped with vanilla bean ice cream. Really simple, but mmmm! it was delicious!
 
chipmunk stew said:
I wish I could give you something with measurements and all. My wife made it, and when I asked her, she said she just made it up as she went along. She just cooked up the strawberry & rhubarb with some sugar and a little water until it was mushy, set it aside to cool, lined some tart tins with pre-made pie crust dough (Pillsbury or something) and pre-cooked the crusts, then filled the tarts with the strawberry mixture blended with a bit of quick-cooking tapioca powder, and cooked it until it set. She served it warm topped with vanilla bean ice cream. Really simple, but mmmm! it was delicious!
Click to expand...

Typical woo evasions and anecdotes...:mad:
 
Jamaican chocolate tower cake recipe:

For cake
2 1/4 cups sifted cake flour
1 3/4 cups sugar
3 teaspoons baking powder
1 teaspoon salt
6 eggs, separated
1/2 cup liquid shortening
3/4 cup water
2 teaspoons vanilla
3 unsweetened chocolate squares
1/2 teaspoon cream of tartar
For filling and frosting
3/4 cup margarine
1 egg
3 unsweetened chocolate squares
3 tablespoons hot water
6 cups sifted powdered sugar
2 teaspoons rum flavoring
1 teaspoon vanilla
1 dash salt
10-12 servings Change size or US/metric
Change to: servings US Metric
1 hour 40 minutes 20 mins prep





1. Sift cake flour, 1 c of the sugar, baking powder and salt into a medium size bowl.
2. Beat egg whites with cream of tartar until foamy white in a large bowl, beat in remaining 3/4 c sugar, 1 t at a time until meringue forms soft peaks.
3. Blend liquid shortening, water, vanilla and egg yolks into flour mixture.
4. Add melted chocolate, beat one minute with electric mixer at low speed or 75 strokes by hand.
5. Fold into meringue until no streaks of white remain.
6. Pour into ungreased 10 inch angel food cake pan.
7. Bake in 325 oven for 1 hour and 20 minutes or until top springs back.
8. Turn pan upside down and set on a bottle.
9. Cool cake completely.
10. Turn onto a wire rack.
11. Split cooled cake into 3 layers.
12. Prepare frosting by melting butter and chocolate in large saucepan.
13. Remove from heat.
14. Beat in powdered sugar gradually with all remaining ingredients until frosting is smooth and creamy.
15. Put cake layers back together with frosting.
16. Spread remaining frosting on sides and tops.
 
Meffy said:
You're making yet another baseless assumption / accusation. I've not said a word concerning what "system I support." I have demanded that you back up your claims with credible evidence. You have failed.

Goodbye.
Click to expand...


Apparently you are unable to recognize or to use credible evidence because this site is loaded with nothing but credible evidence.

http://concretecore.741.com

You are irresponsible, lacking in integrity and unaccountable.
 
Christophera said:
Apparently you are unable to recognize or to use credible evidence because this site is loaded with nothing but credible evidence.

http://concretecore.741.com

You are irresponsible, lacking in integrity and unaccountable.
Click to expand...

One of your sources is a UNC class project.

"The class divided into three teams. The first team completed a report
on the World Trade Center project. The second team compiled information
on the impacts that the project had on Lower Manhattan. The third team
examined the architectural, engineering, and real estate aspects of the
project. "
 
Christophera said:
Apparently you are unable to recognize or to use credible evidence because this site is loaded with nothing but credible evidence.

http://concretecore.741.com

You are irresponsible, lacking in integrity and unaccountable.
Click to expand...

In your MSNBC article Leslie Robertson makes no comments about any concrete core. It's also interesting to see that he agrees with the official version, fire caused the collapse.

"As the fire raged it got hotter and hotter and the steel got weaker and weaker"
 
Hmmm... Maybe if i post it again.

bob_kark said:
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?
Click to expand...
 
Christophera said:
Wrong. I've come to this forum with redundant evidence of the concrerte core.

http://concretecore.741.com

Asking for one piece of evidence supporting the NIST strucuture analysis and not one piece of evidence has been produced.

You are trying to make white into black.

Think about the young children who lost parent on 9-11 at the WTC. Say a 5 year old who knew their parent well but couldn't understand why they never came home from work. Do they wonder how the parent died? Jumping from the roof, breathing smoke, crushed in a series of massive high speed detonations.

Now they are 10. They understand that when people are murdered an investigation must take place. They understand there was none and instead, other children in other parts of the world are attacked and killed.

How do they feel about the sytem you are supporting?
Click to expand...

You lied about the rate at wich the towers collapsed.

You lied about the shelf life of C-4.

You lied about the content of the pictures you posted.

You lied about your own qualifications and experience.

You lied about easily verifiable historical facts such as the make-up of the core of the WTC.

Such a clear pattern of dishonesty, given the subject matter, makes it clear that you are operating as an agent of Al-Queada with orders to disrupt the public disourse here on "the home front" and weaken the nations resolve to fight the enemy.

I have just three questions for you:

1. What are you recieving from your new masters that it's worth betraying your country?

2. What would you say to the families of the 9-11 victims and to the families of fallen soldiers?

3. Are you aware that offering aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war is a DEATH PENALTY offense in America?

(See? We can engage in hyperbole and hysterical, logically shoddy accusations too.)
 
Christophera said:
Apparently you are unable to recognize or to use credible evidence because this site is loaded with nothing but credible evidence.

http://concretecore.741.com

You are irresponsible, lacking in integrity and unaccountable.
Click to expand...

You cite this article as supporting your claims.

At the end of that article, a link is cited Here.

From the source of your article-
"The twin towers were the first supertall buildings designed without any masonry. Worried that the intense air pressure created by the buildings' high speed elevators might buckle conventional shafts, engineers designed a solution using a drywall system fixed to the reinforced steel core..."

Also, the author dismisses the controlled demolition theory. He also states that "even though the steel didnt melt, the type of temperatures in the fire would have roughly halved its strength."
 
Christophera said:
Apparently you are unable to recognize or to use credible evidence because this site is loaded with nothing but credible evidence.

http://concretecore.741.com

You are irresponsible, lacking in integrity and unaccountable.
Click to expand...

This source quotes a passage from a book called "Essential New York". Despite no mention being made of any concrete core in the quoted material, the autor of the article sums up the passage by saying - "In other words, [the towers] were held up by it's reinforced concrete core".

As a matter of fact, nowhere in the entry for the WTC in Tauranac's "Essential New York" is there mention of a concrete core. Instead, there is only the ambiguous mention of "cores of the building rising first".

The mention of the concrete core does not come from the source material, but rather from the author's misinterpretation of that material.

(edited for clarity)
 
senorpogo said:
You cite this article as supporting your claims.

At the end of that article, a link is cited Here.

From the source of your article-
"The twin towers were the first supertall buildings designed without any masonry. Worried that the intense air pressure created by the buildings' high speed elevators might buckle conventional shafts, engineers designed a solution using a drywall system fixed to the reinforced steel core..."

Also, the author dismisses the controlled demolition theory. He also states that "even though the steel didnt melt, the type of temperatures in the fire would have roughly halved its strength."
Click to expand...

From the same site http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.shtml

One demolition expert on the day of the collapse said it looked like implosion but this is not very strong evidence. Implosion firstly requires a lot of explosives placed in strategic areas all around the building. When and how was this explosive placed in the building without anyone knowing about it. Second, implosion required more than just explosives. Demolition experts spend weeks inside a derelict building planning an event. Many of the beams are cut through by about 90% so that the explosion only has to break a small bit of steel. In this state the building is highly dangerous, and there is no way such a prepared building could still be running day to day like WTC was.
Click to expand...
 
senorpogo said:
In your MSNBC article Leslie Robertson makes no comments about any concrete core.
Click to expand...

That is true, the author says that part but no quote from Leslie that says that. May have simply been a wrong assumption when writing that part.

Also interesting to note is that Leslie Robertson helped out with both the FEMA and NIST investigations (as well as helping the rescue workers at ground zero by providing some of the WTC plans). So if he helped the NIST with their report, and he is the WTC engineer on record, then it must have just slipped his mind that the buildings actually had a concrete core...:confused: (unless you want to bust out the old standbye of "he's lying" in which case he joins the mass of other ranks that are allegedly lying about 9/11, and he has given many lectures about this topic since then. You'd think he'd have had plenty of time in any of them to say "The core I built was not the core in the NIST report!".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom