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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Christophera said:
Here is an image showing what can only be the 3" HIGH TENSILE STEEL REBAR ON 4' CENTERS from the 1990 documentary called "Construction of the Twin Towers."
Click to expand...


Christophera... think about this..

That is a photo of the building from after it collapsed, on September 11, 2001. How did such an image make it into the 1990 documentary "Construction of the Twin Towers" as you claim above?

That is absurd.

-Andrew
 
gumboot said:
That is a photo of the building from after it collapsed, on September 11, 2001. How did such an image make it into the 1990 documentary "Construction of the Twin Towers" as you claim above?
Click to expand...
Proof it's a conspiracy reaching to the highest depths of Thuh Gummint! Who else besides top spooks would have access to time machines?
 
One other thing, Mr. Brown:

Will you be retracting the following statement, as posted at http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=5637&st=30, page 3?

Just got banned from randi.org. What an amazing 36 hours. Never seen more disinfos on one forum so well aligned, but some of them wern't and they didn't know it. Fortunately I'd seen every argument about 20 times and was totally prepared. After 250 posts in the thread they resorted to posted baking recipes, reciting "Henry the Eighth I am" posting pictures of fruit and cats.

It was astounding, not one single image of the structure NIST says existed was produced in 350 posts to support that the core was made of steel columns. Then the mods decided; after a few posters started realizing that I was answering every question with logic and reasoning consistent with all the construction technique/knowledge they knew and began asking good quetions, showing they were really understanding that the tower cores were concrete; that my links and image posts were violations and banned me.
Click to expand...
 
Christophera must hold the record: 557 posts, and how many have had any accurate information? Maybe two or three? Maybe none?

Hey, Christophera, figure out which tower your core photo belongs to yet?

Please seek professional help for your mental problems.
 
In addition,

Christophera @ forum.phyorg.com said:
It was astounding, not one single image of the structure NIST says existed was produced in 350 posts to support that the core was made of steel columns. Then the mods decided; after a few posters started realizing that I was answering every question with logic and reasoning consistent with all the construction technique/knowledge they knew and began asking good quetions, showing they were really understanding that the tower cores were concrete; that my links and image posts were violations and banned me.
Click to expand...
Do you know this for a fact, or are you simply speculating?

(Bolding mine.)
 
Christophera said:
I certainly don't have a reason to, because what I said is true.

In my abscense no one piece of raw evidence has been posted to support the denial here.
Click to expand...
You mean "In my abcess," don't you? Because dozens of people have posted the evidence that comprehensively refutes your claims. I've removed them because I needed to make room in my VB Image Host box, but if anyone new here is interested, I have numerous photos that prove the core was steel and not concrete.
 
Gravy said:
You mean "In my abcess," don't you? Because dozens of people have posted the evidence that comprehensively refutes your claims. I've removed them because I needed to make room in my VB Image Host box, but if anyone new here is interested, I have numerous photos that prove the core was steel and not concrete.
Click to expand...

By all means. I've been waiting years to see proof of the steel core columns from deniers of the concrete core.

Why not make a web page about the steel core of the towers like I have with the concrete core site?

What is typically produced is mis identified photos from constructon that show the interior box columns. You most likely have more of those.
 
Christophera said:
By all means. I've been waiting years to see proof of the steel core columns from deniers of the concrete core.

Why not make a web page about the steel core of the towers like I have with the concrete core site?

What is typically produced is mis identified photos from constructon that show the interior box columns. You most likely have more of those.
Click to expand...

Unless you can bring something to the table aside from your same, overused, misinterpreted photos then please, by all means, STFU.
 
Even School Kids Know There Was A Concrete Core

Woody- said:
Well there is this one about no concrete core.

http://noconcretecore.741.com/
Click to expand...

Remarkable. An entire website trying to document something that didn't exist and doing so by misrepresenting images of the WTC towers during construction when the page they are trying to counter that uses images of demolition explains that the concrete core, being inside the steel framework, was not generally visible during construction.

What is great is the page authors found an archive to a site that shows even grade schoolers know that the towers had concrete cores.

(2) The concrete core acted as the building's vertebrate. But it only carried the dead load of the elevators and stairwells within. In both towers, the planes came very close to crashing directly into the core. Any closer, and the buildings would have collapsed in no time.

(5) Concrete Core - central column supports much of building's weight

Smart kids!

http://web.archive.org/web/20041113...t/torsbergweb/2002/1st/hour8/wtc/graphic.html

Good work guys, you are real good losers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom