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

[joseph k.]

Christophera has the obsessiveness, the pseudo-rationality, the stubbornness, and the bizarre creativity of an autist.

As an armchair psychology buff, I think I would lean toward something related, that being Asperger's Syndrome. Given his ability to express himself fairly well with language, this seems plausible.
...
(3) a lack of spontaneous seeking to share enjoyment, interests, or
achievements with other people (e.g. by a lack of showing,
bringing, or pointing out objects of interest to other people)

(4) lack of social or emotional reciprocity

B. Restricted repetitive and stereotyped patterns of behavior,
interests, and activities, as manifested by at least one of the
following:

(1) encompassing preoccupation with one or more stereotyped and
restricted patterns of interest that is abnormal either in
intensity or focus

(2) apparently inflexible adherence to specific, nonfunctional
routines or rituals

...
(4) persistent preoccupation with parts of objects

from: http://www.autism-resources.com/autismfaq-simi.html

Of course I am no expert and this is just speculation.

If this is the case, my apologies, Christophera. I hope you can be helped.

 

[Apollyon]

Wrong. I know how the WTC was constructed and very few of the engineers do. Their theories do not explain the rates of fall nor do they explain total pulverization.

Since they do not, and I do, and you do not like my scenario you must come up with an alternative IF you think our Constitution is worth preserving.

You can't know how the WTC was constructed because you haven't provided any solid evidence whatsoever of your claims.

But it's a sure sign a looney is speaking when they claim to have special knowledge that nobody else but them possess and, even they are not an expert of any sort, they know better than all of the real experts.

 

[gumboot]

Wrong. I know how the WTC was constructed and very few of the engineers do.

These engineers that don't know how the WTC was constructed seem to include the man that built it.

Interesting. Perhaps, like yourself, he just *imagined* it, then woke up one morning and there they were.

-Andrew

 

[Christophera]

Belz:

You can make relatively smooth cuts with LSCs (see the second picture I linked), but they are NOT going to be smooth, right-angle cuts, perfectly straight, with no blast marks.

We are not talking about an LSC, we are talking something that cuts like an LSC but much better because of the containment more complete while being as hard as the material being cut and having a smooth edge.

All it would really take is a picture of an explosive-cut steel beam, that can be verified as such. But Christophera can't provide that, because he's lying.

You are in the military and if you/they are still concerned about preserving our Constitution, our rights and freedoms, then you will find away to confirm this.

I am not lying, I believe what I am saying. I could be wrong but the fact that the official story does not account for the high rates of fall or the pulverization of everything, means that I might be right, because I do explosion those things.

So if you take your soldiers oath seriously, and something tells me you do. You will determine if i am wrong with certainty by sourceing information only you have access to.

Just as he's lying when he claims that freefall and near freefall are identical (the actual difference was 20% to 30%, more than enough to account for all factors).

Those rates of fall, TWICE all the way to the ground are impossible with a collapse, let alone the towers which were way too strong.

Frank Demartini's Statement

Frank A. Demartini, on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, spoke of the resilience of the towers in an interview recorded on January 25, 2001.
The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door -- this intense grid -- and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.

Demartini, who had an office on the 88th floor of the North Tower, has been missing since the 9/11/01 attack, having remained in the North Tower to assist in the evacuation.

Just like he's lying when he says there is no other explanation fo rthe collapse (20 stories falling on the lower 80 stories of a building will collapse it, pretty much straight down and with little slowing).

Just like he's lying when he repeatedly claims that a spire and part of the external wall are photos of 3" rebar oin 4' centers (which doesn't even exist in any other known application).

Just like he's lying when he claims that concrete encasement (an alkaline, porous, water-permiable barrier) will extend shelf life (ever seem human remains recovered from concrete? It doesn't preserve very well at all. Shows how much good common sense is, eh?).

Just like he's lying when he calims a smoke colum is part of the core (there should be pictures from many other angles and other cameras showing this, why are you relying on two from a great distance?).

Just like he's lying when he claims to have explained all this on his site and demands we read it (all we want are the original sources, not your baseless allegations).

Just like he's lying when he claims to not be accusing anyone of mass murder (you are accusing the U.S. government, or at least large parts of it, of being complicit in this).

Just like there's very little he's been truthful about.

And Christophera, if you can provide actual evidence to support your assertions (you are correct that they aren't theories, but they aren't even hypothesis, they're pure speculation based on nothing), if you can provide original sources to verify your information (not just things you explain away, but actual, positive evidecne), then I will be the first to apologize to you, take back everything I've stated, admit I was wrong, and do my best to get your story out there.

But, unlike you, I refuse to accuse the innocent of murder without sufficient evidence. Because, unlike you, I actually support all the rights granted by our Constitution, such as the right to fair trial, innocent until proven guilty, and free speech.

Show us the evidence. Show us the math that explains why the towers fell too fast. Show us the records of huge amounts of concrete being ordered and delivered to the WTC towers for the core. SHow us the evidence of rebar (not the external cladding and wall). SHow us a clear, verifiable photo of this concrete core existing at any stage of the WTC construction or demolition.

So far, you simply conducted in enormous amounts of post hoc rationalization to explain wjhy your theory is still correct when we've presented contrary evidence. You've grapsed at every straw to keep your theory from being wrong. You engaged in logical fallacy after logical fallacy. You refuse to provide any sources except your own website, which I wouldn't believe if it stated the sky was blue (I'd look out a window to check it first).

All we want is verifiable, reliable evidence, not speculation and a couple of poor-quality photos...not obvious misrepresentation (rebar...right), not outlandish, impossible theories (rebar coated in C-4..you must realize that this would remove any structural support the rebar provided, and weaken the concrete structure as well, right?).

Evidence. Facts. Numbers to show it couldn't be any other way.

Oh, and Belz:

Bachelor's Omelette:

5 medium eggs
Cooking oil
Milk
Salt and Pepper
About 1 egg's worth (by volume) Meat (anything in the fridge, leftover ham, lunch meat, bacon, sausage, etc)
About 1 egg's worth (by volume) cheese (anything that happens to be left, american, swiss, cheddar, etc...but for Ed's sake avoid Velveeta)
Onions, mushrooms, tomatoes, other assorted vegetables to taste (1 to two eggs worth by volume).

Beat eggs until smooth and yellow. Add in a dab of milk (to help them smooth out).

Chop other ingredients into small pieces, combine in single bowl/cup/paper towel.

Coat the frying pan in cooking oil (a thing layer is plenty). Heat at low-medium heat for a few minutes. Pour in your egg mixture. Once the egg will remain in one piece, add in the other ingredients. If needed, use the spatula to spread then around/mix them up. Fold the egg over the ingredients. Flip the omeletee. Takes only a few minutes to finish cooking after the ingredients are added.

Serve with toast, milk, juice, leftover beer, warm soda, or whatever else is available.

Serves one male Bachelor (or three new girlfriends).

We know, that you know you are losing the argument when you start posting recipes.

 

[gumboot]

Wow. that is a relevant correction. I hope the children that lost their parents in the towers appreciate your work.

That's the second false statement in this thread that you have admitted to me you have made.

-Andrew

 

[Christophera]

You can't know how the WTC was constructed because you haven't provided any solid evidence whatsoever of your claims.

Two web sites.

http://concretecore.741.com

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

substantiate my claims with evidence that is reasonably used. You have provided no qualified evidence whatsoever.

But it's a sure sign a looney is speaking when they claim to have special knowledge that nobody else but them possess and, even they are not an expert of any sort, they know better than all of the real experts.

The real experts are scared. knowledgeable citizens who are not scared have expressed their support for the scenario I put forth.

Here is one.

FROM Let's Roll 9-11.

Endgame
Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Posts: 439
Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 6:14 pm Post subject:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm with Christopher on this one.

Those towers were reduced to dust. The top sections above the damaged towers were dust before they hit the ground.

Let's say that these top sections fell 4 storeys before crushing the lower floors, leading to the "pancaking" collapse. Sure, the weight of the falling upper sections was very substancial, but was it enough to pulverise to dust the hundreds of storeys below?

And where's the stack of pancakes when all was said and done?

Floor by floor the supports gave way and the towers went down. When there was once 10 feet of air between each floor, now there was none. Where's the frickin stack of matter that made up those very floors?

These bastards were playing with a stacked deck! They had various factors in their arsenal of tricks that gave them supreme confidence in 9/11's execution and the quick to follow cover-up.
..................
When explosives are sheltered from elements such as oxygen, heat and light, do they go bad? I dunno. Seems like a great environment to store them for later use. Again, they know something I'll never figure out or be able to explain as a mere blue-collar joe. Without Christopher's work, I would have never imagined anything close to that level of detail. Now, there's nothing better out there to explain the collapse in my mind.

Respect the enemy. One does not wage war against his foe unless that very foe is identified as weak and incapable of great resistance. No one fires the first shot when the odds are stacked against them. We are the Republican Guard of society. Thought to be well trained, well equipped, and strong enough to repel the invaders. When the shooting started on 9/11, all of our wit, knowledge and understanding of self came crashing down. We broke up and fled to safety, not to re-group and fight again, but to hide and take the hand of the enemy. We surrendered.

We here are the insurgents of 9/11. Using what little power we have to discomfort the occupation, we fight on in hopes of our enemy slipping up and being discovered. Divided and in conflict, we are going nowhere. You don't have to believe the WTC explosive possibility, not one bit. But to mock those who are your comrades, will leave us forever in this struggle.

 

[Christophera]

That's the second false statement in this thread that you have admitted to me you have made.

-Andrew

Clearly you do not know the difference between "false" and an "error". Let alone an insignificant error within the discussion.

You only point it out in your incompetent/evasive fashion because you are so impotent in this discussion where you have no evidence to reason with so seek to escape the hard realities of the loss of our rights and freedoms as a result of this massive deception.

 

[gumboot]

Respect the enemy. One does not wage war against his foe unless that very foe is identified as weak and incapable of great resistance. No one fires the first shot when the odds are stacked against them...

Wow... that was an awesome speech from whoever that crazy nut was. I'm gonna hafta put that in a film one day.

Bit of tweaking and I could definately see Mel Gibson giving his shaken troops a backbone...

-Andrew

 

[gumboot]

You only point it out in your incompetent/evasive fashion because you are so impotent in this discussion where you have no evidence to reason with so seek to escape the hard realities of the loss of our rights and freedoms as a result of this massive deception.

Again... the loss of *your* rights and freedoms. My rights and freedoms are nice and safe.

-Andrew

 

[Christophera]

These engineers that don't know how the WTC was constructed seem to include the man that built it.

Interesting. Perhaps, like yourself, he just *imagined* it, then woke up one morning and there they were.

-Andrew

i notice you have no link to support what you say. i have noticed that Robertson implies that there were steel core columns but doesn't actually say it. He is afraid. Engineers are often not very brave.

Leslie Robertson, Architect Of The World Trade Center Towers

Still, Robertson, whose firm is responsible for three of the six tallest buildings in the world, feels a sense of pride that the massive towers, supported by a steel-tube exoskeleton and a reinforced concrete core, held up as well as they did—managing to stand for over an hour despite direct hits from two massive commercial jetliners.

Says engineer Robertson, “If they had fallen down immediately, the death counts would have been unimaginable,” he says. “The World Trade Center has performed admirably, and everyone involved in the project should be proud.” The buildings were designed specifically to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707, the largest plane flying in 1966, the year they broke ground on the project.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3069641/

 

[Hellbound]

Idiocy.

No, Christophera, I won't confirm your sotry, because I can't. My sources do NOT agree with your statements, which is why I'm asking you where you got yoru information.

Apparently, you seem to be admitting that you just made it up because it sounded good to you.

I do take my oath seriously. I also take accusations of murder seriously. And, I take false accusations seriously, especially when they are repeated ad nauseum without evidence.

Evidence. That's all I'm asking. Let's try a simple yes or no, can you provide reliable, positive evidence of your assertions? Any one you want. Show the math and physics that shows the towers fell too fast, or couldn't pulverize concrete. Show a picture that shows the actual concrete core, or additional pictures and video that show the core you see in smoke. Verify your pictures of explosive-cut steel (which you were insistent were explosive-cut, and now seem to have backed off on...could it be because you were demonstrably wrong?).

Oh, any by the way, linking to your own website

Two web sites.

http://concretecore.741.com

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

substantiate my claims with evidence that is reasonably used. You have provided no qualified evidence whatsoever.

does not provide support for your claims. Give us the original sources, not some guys interpretation, or someone else's theory without evidence.

Those don't provide evidecne that is reasonably used, they provide post hoc rationalization that grasps at every straw, no matter how thin, to maintian the increasingly untenable conclusion that the WTC towers were brought down with explosives.

 

[Christophera]

Again... the loss of *your* rights and freedoms. My rights and freedoms are nice and safe.

-Andrew

As a government employee, about 2 weeks ago you lost your citizens right to free speech when reporting corruption and wrongdoing in government. You can now be legally discriminated against for trying to keep government lawful.

About 4 days ago you lost the right to have law enforcement knock before entering on a warrant.

You are ignorant.

 

[Apollyon]

Two web sites.

http://concretecore.741.com

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

substantiate my claims with evidence that is reasonably used. You have provided no qualified evidence whatsoever.

Wow. You Just. Don't. Get. It.

Linking to one other like-minded looney (who is also not an expert) and your OWN website to substantiate your claim doesn't give it validation. In fact, it looks really idiotic to reference yourself as a source of verification.

I and many others in here have provided plenty of links to statements by the original builders, statements by experts, pictures of the original construction, and pictures post-9/11 that demonstrate your claims to be false.

The real experts are scared. knowledgeable citizens who are not scared have expressed their support for the scenario I put forth.

Here is one.

FROM Let's Roll 9-11.

Endgame
Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Posts: 439
Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 6:14 pm Post subject:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm with Christopher on this one.

Those towers were reduced to dust. The top sections above the damaged towers were dust before they hit the ground.

Let's say that these top sections fell 4 storeys before crushing the lower floors, leading to the "pancaking" collapse. Sure, the weight of the falling upper sections was very substancial, but was it enough to pulverise to dust the hundreds of storeys below?

And where's the stack of pancakes when all was said and done?

Floor by floor the supports gave way and the towers went down. When there was once 10 feet of air between each floor, now there was none. Where's the frickin stack of matter that made up those very floors?

These bastards were playing with a stacked deck! They had various factors in their arsenal of tricks that gave them supreme confidence in 9/11's execution and the quick to follow cover-up.
..................
When explosives are sheltered from elements such as oxygen, heat and light, do they go bad? I dunno. Seems like a great environment to store them for later use. Again, they know something I'll never figure out or be able to explain as a mere blue-collar joe. Without Christopher's work, I would have never imagined anything close to that level of detail. Now, there's nothing better out there to explain the collapse in my mind.

Respect the enemy. One does not wage war against his foe unless that very foe is identified as weak and incapable of great resistance. No one fires the first shot when the odds are stacked against them. We are the Republican Guard of society. Thought to be well trained, well equipped, and strong enough to repel the invaders. When the shooting started on 9/11, all of our wit, knowledge and understanding of self came crashing down. We broke up and fled to safety, not to re-group and fight again, but to hide and take the hand of the enemy. We surrendered.

We here are the insurgents of 9/11. Using what little power we have to discomfort the occupation, we fight on in hopes of our enemy slipping up and being discovered. Divided and in conflict, we are going nowhere. You don't have to believe the WTC explosive possibility, not one bit. But to mock those who are your comrades, will leave us forever in this struggle.

Uh huh, and I'm sure when this guy went back to his job driving a truck he was very proud of his comment.

 

[Hellbound]

i notice you have no link to support what you say. i have noticed that Robertson implies that there were steel core columns but doesn't actually say it. He is afraid. Engineers are often not very brave.

You are an idiot.

CTers are not very brave, either.

I was an engineer, and worked with several. In an active war zone. Multiple times. We were combat engineers, our job was to go in before the infantry and armor, so they'd have a path to follow through minefields, rivers, cliffs, etc.

I realize the combat engineer is a special case, but your sweeping generalization is completely unsupported and absolutely false. There are brave engineers and cowardly engineers. You are, again, simply making any insane, irrational statement you can think of so you don't have to realize your theory is absolutely worthless.

So, again, any evidence?

 

[Johnny Pixels]

The interior box columns, I think, were 24 inches thick at lower levels and 14 inches up higher. The perimeter box columns were 14 inches for sure. The spacing was 20 feet between them and they were up to 5 inches thick at the bottom.

Gamma radiography was not around in 1968.

My boss started out his career in radiography using gamma ray sources on the Trans Austria Gas Pipeline in 1966.

I believe those columns may be too thick for on-site radiography, but may well have been inspected using a much stronger source, such as Cobalt-60, in an off-site exposure bay. The inspected sections would then have to be bolted together if the onsite welds could not be tested because there would be no way of ensuring they were fit to bear any kind of load.

 

[aggle-rithm]

Frank Demartini's Statement

Frank A. Demartini, on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, spoke of the resilience of the towers in an interview recorded on January 25, 2001.
The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door -- this intense grid -- and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.

Demartini, who had an office on the 88th floor of the North Tower, has been missing since the 9/11/01 attack, having remained in the North Tower to assist in the evacuation.

And it DID survive an airline crash! It was the fire that brought it down.

By the way, the towers were designed to withstand an ACCIDENTAL airline crash, not a deliberate attempt to bring them down. The differences are 1) in such an accident, you wouldn't expect the plane to be fully fueled, and 2) you wouldn't expect it to be at cruising speed.

 

[Hellbound]

As a government employee, about 2 weeks ago you lost your citizens right to free speech when reporting corruption and wrongdoing in government. You can now be legally discriminated against for trying to keep government lawful.

About 4 days ago you lost the right to have law enforcement knock before entering on a warrant.

You are ignorant.

Prove this. You are, quite blatantly, lying.

I still have not only the right, but the responsibility to report corruption and fraud. Failure to do so will place me under liability.

And no one has removed the search and siezure laws regarding police entry. There are specifric instances where a knock is not required, and always have been (imminent danger, for one).

So, any evidence? OR is this more of your mindless spouting off to support your theory, regardless of facts?

 

[gumboot]

As a government employee, about 2 weeks ago you lost your citizens right to free speech when reporting corruption and wrongdoing in government. You can now be legally discriminated against for trying to keep government lawful.

About 4 days ago you lost the right to have law enforcement knock before entering on a warrant.

You are ignorant.

I'm afraid you're the ignorant one.

1\ I'm not a government employee - I'm actually self employed.
2\ I'm not AN AMERICAN. I do not live in America, and I never have. With any luck I never will.

Got it?

-Andrew

 

[Hellbound]

And it DID survive an airline crash! It was the fire that brought it down.

By the way, the towers were designed to withstand an ACCIDENTAL airline crash, not a deliberate attempt to bring them down. The differences are 1) in such an accident, you wouldn't expect the plane to be fully fueled, and 2) you wouldn't expect it to be at cruising speed.

Just to elaborate, they were desinged to take a low speed crash from a smaller jet (152,400 kgs compared to 179,170 kgs) at a much lower speed (an assumed failed takeoff/landing at about 160mph compared to a high-speed impact at 550mph). Do the math:

Kinetic energy is 1/2*m*v²
Kinetic energy designed for = 1/2*152,400 kgs*72 m/s* 72 m/s=395,020,800kgm²/s²
Kinetic energy taken on 9/11 = 1/2*179,170 kgs*246 m/s* 246 m/s=5,421,325,860kgm²/s²
Over TEN TIMES the impact energy they were designed for.

That is, sadly, a non-argument.

 

[joseph k.]

Huntsman, I think he is referring to this:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13339498/

[about knocking]