• 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.
pchams said:
I have been following this thread in its entirety, and since the first link I clicked on that Christophera posted had spam popups for antispyware, I have to conclude that the OP is just having you all on to get clicks on his webpage.
I mean, come on. The exact same nonsense and links are posted in each post.
He has presented no evidence that is conclusive, and he refuses to accept the mountain of evidence that has been produced for him.
You've been had by a click-miner.
He did a great job too.
Click to expand...

There is willfull ignorance here, imposed even. No desire for conclusion exists. Folks here support the lie that murderers hide behind while removing our rights and freedoms. I have logically qualified that evidence at its level of usefulness as it has been incompetently presented or misrepresented altogether.
 
Again, what is your criteria for evidence?

I ask, because you seem to be holding your evidence to a much lower standard of verification and acceptance than any that we present, and it seems hypocritical to me.
 
Stellafane said:
Hmm, interesting theory. It would explain a lot. I mean, no one can really be that stubbornly, mind-numbingly stupid, right? (Right??)

On the other hand, I'm not so sure. I suspect Christophera might indeed be the real deal. Hard to decide which is the more reprehensible form of low-life -- a spammer, or a slime merchant.
Click to expand...

To you a truth seeker is the worst.
 
gumboot said:
Let me get this straight. You're saying that photo can't be showing core columns because there are not steel core columns? This is your response to our evidence? Why bother asking for it then?
-Andrew
Click to expand...

I ask because you support the lie that steel core columns existed inside the core. I know that you cannot produce such so I win the argument by default.

Unless you believe the towers had an "Air Core".
 
Christophera said:
That image can only be 3" REBAR ON 4' CENTERS because this image of the SPIRE taken a second before from the same camera shows 14 inch thick interior box columns providing scale. NOTE: The slight curve to the fine vertical elements. There is actually nothing else it can be except rebar.
Click to expand...

Again, from this distance there is no way you can MEASURE anything.
 
Christophera said:
Apparently you are unfamiliar with high tensile steel and it properties. There is no alternative to this being 3" REBAR ON 4' CENTERS as this image taken a second earlier provides scale.
INTERIOR BOX COLUMNS
Click to expand...
The explanation has already been provided that that picture shows a corner portion of the exterior wall structure. For some odd reason it appears very clearly to be that to everyone except for you.

Also, you been told that there is no such thing as 3" rebar on 4' centers. First of all, rebar is denoted by imperial bar size, not inches and rebar is not even available in a 3" size as a standard. Rebar is also typically a mild steel, not a high tensile steel. And last and certainly not least, in regards to shear walls, UBC and IBC designates for a MAXIMUM spacing for rebar of 30". For areas in which winds speeds can exceed 70 mph (of which NYC is such a place) UBC and IBC designates that rebar be used on 15" centers. NOBODY uses rebar on 48" centers. So stop making crap up please.
 
 
Apollyon said:
Another issue is that C4 requires a primer, a blasting cap, to cause it to detonate. Not only must the shelf life of C4 be considered, but that of the primer as well.

Either way, to imagine that at least some of that C4 and the primers remained chemically viable while encased in concrete, which would be a pretty nasty alkaline environment to be encased in, for almost 40 years requires a complete suspension of logical thought.
Click to expand...


READ

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

The placing of explosives and primers were 3o years apart.
 
Seeing as Christophera is watching right now, let me ask him again whether the documentary in question is this one.

Also, I'm rather interested in the response to the apparent conflict between PBS's expert and Christophera, regarding the construction of the supporting columns.
 
Hutch said:
I could be wrong here, but I do have some knowledge on shelf-life items and it seems to me that the "useful" life of an explosive is less than the shelf life--in other words, once you pull that item from the shelf and install it, your time to use it decreases. I am not sure if that applies to C-4 type explosives, but I do know that it applies to other types of high explosives.
Click to expand...

Encapsulation in concrete of fresh material assures LONGER than the manufacturers shelf life.

NO, I'm not providing proof of that. Common sense dictates the realiztion that a foot of concrete is a better seal than 6 mil's of cellophane.
 
Christophera said:
This disproves your suggestion. Thecore, the
core lower
Click to expand...

Christophera said:
Columns not cut after demo. Prove there is a method to do this.
Click to expand...

You mean, there is NO way to cut steel columns outside of explosives ??

Plenty of Concrete shown in demolition.
Click to expand...

Indeed. From that distance, though, can you even tell if it's "pulverised" or not ? Really ? Look at this:

110947main_galaxy1.jpg


You'd swear it's just made of gas and light. But if you look REAL close, you'd see individual STARS.

From such a distance you couldn't make any kind of judgment about that...
 
Christophera said:
READ

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

The placing of explosives and primers were 3o years apart.
Click to expand...
And you have pictures or video of people placing the primers? You have pictures of the primers in place? Where does this information come from and how was it absolutely verified. Or are you just pulling something from between your glut's?

Don't bother linking to your own site anymore for explanations either. Linking to yourself for reference purposes is like allowing a criminal to be the judge of their own trial.
 
Christophera said:
Apparently you are unfamiliar with high tensile steel and it properties. There is no alternative to this being 3" REBAR ON 4' CENTERS as this image taken a second earlier provides scale.
INTERIOR BOX COLUMNS
Click to expand...

Christophera said:
They are different images. This of the INTERIOR BOX COLUMNS or spire and this, 3" REBAR ON 4' CENTERS which is rebar.

By default I am correct. You have no reasonable alternative.

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

Christophera said:
There is no alternative, This is a High speed series of very well contained and distributed high explosives..
Click to expand...

Just saying so doesn't make it true.

There ARE alternatives, all of which have been proposed on this thread. You're just ignoring them because it doesn't fit your preconceived notions.
 
Christophera said:
One does not answer "points". Ask a queston.

How did the rest of the tower fall if the core wasn't yet detonated ?

Correct, it is it's greater meaning.
Click to expand...

No. It doesn't. It means what it means.

I cannot verify what I draw so why should I try. I've provided a core hallway layout fro WTC 1 which I know and at the site,

http://concretecore.741.com

Is proof. You'll have to read tho, and we cannot be sure that you can do that at all, or at least competently.
Click to expand...

I can't read Drivel. I only read English and French.

Christophera said:
This has not been shown. Ask yourself. Here is the answer.

You have no evidence or argument
Click to expand...

You're a common case of someone who thinks saying something makes it true. Like the following example:

KID: "When I die, I'm going to go to heaven."
BELZ...: "Kid, you don't know that."
KID: " I WILL!! I WILL!! I WILL!!!"
BELZ...: "Sure, kid."
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom