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

[Belz...]

These are links to engineering site that are not CT sites and they know about the concrete core. This site is not a CT site.

http://concretecore.741.com

So, you're not a conspiracy theorist ?

 

[Christophera]

Seems to me that some of your links done really support your concrete core theory entirely.

I read them and accept the inconsistencies because the basic statements about the concrete are quite similar.

As no answers are forthcoming to my questions, my opposition in this thread can be considered weak.

 

[Christophera]

I don't think Americans are stupid. I think some people, of all nationalities, are stupid.

Now that this is out of the way, will you retract your claim that the columns were all "one piece" ?

This structural engineer not only remembers the documentary but also the concrete core. We talked about it for 30 minutes then I told him what FEMA said it was. Later he would not include the concrete core in his declaration. People like you make good Americans afraid.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=2934&stc=1&d=1157305577

He says civil engineer.

Is there any way to contact him and confirm his story ?[/QUOTE]

Not for you.

 

[Christophera]

So, you're not a conspiracy theorist ?

The site is not a CT site.


I'm not a theorist, I have facts about all of my assertions and because things are so screwed up, they need explanations so theory falls short of describing my explanations of possibilities.

 

[Architect]

Chris, still waiting for that cogent summarised question, mate

 

[Woody-]

Chris, still waiting for that cogent summarised question, mate

I still want to see a floor diagram that shows where the concrete is in the core, and the stairways, and all the passenger and freight elevators.

And a CLEAR picture of the concrete core at any point of time would be nice also.(Ive seen those few dust covered low-res things so many times in this thread I almost want to puke)

 

[delphi_ote]

<smacks himself on the forehead> OF COURSE!! Gravy! Get me some steel! Huntsman! Get me some concrete trucks, please. Delphi! I'll need some office furniture. Steal it if you have to. Shrinker! Cables and electricity, if you will. Pardalis! I need two 767s ready to roll. I'll get some cranes. Bob_kark... just keep counting those socks, man.

Okay. We should have two brand-new WTCs in just a few years. Then we can test the theory.

Fine. I guess I'm going to have to go on yet another Office Depot/Office Max crime spree. Being a JREF Ninja really sucks sometimes. Maybe I can make it a challenge by using only weapons I find on the premises; stapler nunchaku, thumbtack caltrops, scissor shurikens, and of course a card board tube katana. I'll leave no trace behind except post it notes that say "JREF Ninja Wave strikes again!"

In the mean time, I'll be reading some motivational posters to focus my chi. Where was I... ah yes, "Strength" ...

 

[delphi_ote]

And a CLEAR picture of the concrete core at any point of time would be nice also.(Ive seen those few dust covered low-res things so many times in this thread I almost want to puke)

And why is it we have to supply said picture? Are we your secretaries? Is your dedication to "the truth" so weak that you sit around demanding others do your research for you?

 

[StoneWT]

Gawd, Christophera has now been driven to create fake notes from engineers to support his fake documentary.

Why are you driven to lie about a tragedy in which 3,000 people died? Christophera, have you no shame? You shouldn't be abusing the memory of the dead in order to give meaning to your life. Please stop dishonoring the dead.

 

[kevin]

engineer not only remembers the documentary but also the concrete core. We talked about it for 30 minutes then I told him what FEMA said it was. Later he would not include the concrete core in his declaration. People like you make good Americans afraid.

That's pathetic. Doesn't say anything about a concrete core. Doesn't say the title of the documentary. Doesn't say the year seen. Doesn't prove he's an engineer. Isn't notarized. (and although I would say this extremely unlikely for you to be this forward thinking, uses the name of the con man from The Music Man)

I've seen better in crayon.

 

[kevin]

That's pathetic. Doesn't say anything about a concrete core. Doesn't say the title of the documentary. Doesn't say the year seen. Doesn't prove he's an engineer. Isn't notarized. (and although I would say this extremely unlikely for you to be this forward thinking, uses the name of the con man from The Music Man)

I've seen better in crayon.

Registered Engineer 20186 is Harold Len Hill. Address can be found via the California registration listing. Enter the license number below.

http://www2.dca.ca.gov/pls/wllpub/wllqryna$lcev2.startup?p_qte_code=ENG&p_qte_pgm_code=7500

I leave my statement as is because it isn't notorized and personally I'd like to see the paper stamped with his seal. But I retract the Music Man comment.

 

[Gravy]

He says civil engineer.
Is there any way to contact him and confirm his story ?

Not for you.

Of course there's a way to contact him.

Licensee Name: HILL HAROLD LEN
License Type: CIVIL ENGINEER
License Number: 20186
License Status: CLEAR Definition
Expiration Date: September 30, 2007
Address: 4358 MODOC RD UNIT J
City: SANTA BARBARA
State: CA
Zip: 93110-1830

 

[Gravy]

Now Christophera. Stop running away and answer my question. This is the fourth time I've asked. http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1894143&postcount=2935

 

[kevin]

Of course there's a way to contact him. http://www2.dca.ca.gov/pls/wllpub/WLLQRYNA$LCEV2.QueryView?P_LICENSE_NUMBER=20186&P_LTE_ID=741

yeah, those stupid california registration links aren't postable for some reason. People will need to go to the base lookup a license and enter the registration number manually.

 

[einsteen]

English is not my first language as you understand, I made some mistakes in what I wanted to say.
I'm trying to go through this thread first but that's almost undoable, get headaches of it. you guys really
have a lot of energy.. I also am relatively new and have to read-in. With floor I actually mean a whole
floor including the surrounding stuff, i.e. also the columns, I mean in fact an etage. Ok, what I've
learned is that each etage becomes weaker if you go to the top, very logical of course but I thought
there was a translation symmetry when I looked at the pictures. Ok thanks for the answers everyone and
the lessons...

Some answers

That's a very bad way to start a post, though, as if JREFers don't use facts. Have you read this thread ?

I've read 30%, you're absolutely right Sir, that was a bad opening and introduction.

Those "explosions" were simply compressed air escaping as the floors collapsed.

But isn't that the classical pancaking that NIST also rejects now ?

No, what is complex is the effort needed to plant thousands of pounds of explosives with nobody noticing.

I've seen hours of Steven E. Jones (I don't know what his reputation is but he is no crackpot or something like that and a respected scientist as fas as I know) and he calculated about 4000kg that should be placed, 10 strong people can do that in 10 times. I cannot post URLs but there was a power-down also once, and what about damned wtc7 that is admitted to be a CD (this starts at the bottom of course)

Quote:
- By the assumption of a domino-effect collapse there can be no transfer of information faster than free-fall.
This is by definition impossible.
How so?

With this I mean a domino-effect transfers it's energy with a limited speed, it can not be faster than a free-fall speed, to be more mathematical the group speed of the effect vg cannot be larger than a point mass you drop, i.e. vg(t) <= v_free(t). If the ploom is part of the effect this is violated. If you have a set of vertical domino stones each stone (or group of stones) that hits the next one will be delayed a little bit, even if there is no structural resistance it will be delayed because of the laws of conservation of momentum and energy. If no explosives cause the ploom what then is the reason ? It's definitely no air, because it's gray *****. Therefore the effect is in fact faster than free fall.

smacks himself on the forehead- OF COURSE!! Gravy! Get me some steel! Huntsman! Get me some concrete trucks, please. Delphi! I'll need some office furniture. Steal it if you have to. Shrinker! Cables and electricity, if you will. Pardalis! I need two 767s ready to roll. I'll get some cranes. Bob_kark... just keep counting those socks, man.

I would have said the same.. I understand that indirect proofs are also true, the sun exists because we measure it.. but could you point me to the NIST report that calculates the collapse time, we again go back to the near-free fall thing, sorry for that, I think it does not exist. NIST agrees with near free-fall they estimated resp 11 and 9 seconds for WTC 1 and 2, but they based it on seismic data and video analysis. Of course what else can you do and would you do if the empirical data is there. The spontaneous collapse theory should at least be consistent with the empirial data. Correct me if I'm wrong but what they do is postulating a kind of collapse theory and claim it must behave in a way that is consistent with the empirical data, that's the other way around.

That doesn't need to happen. All you need is to bring the 78th floor (WTC2) to the point where it CAN'T handle the weight of 32 floors above it. Once the collapse starts, as someone said, the load that comes down on 77th will be 20-100 times greater than what it was designed to handle.

Alright then. It carried the load for 30 years and 50 minutes... I thought there is video evidence of sound of explosions before the first crunch.

 

[Christophera]

I do. It's called the NIST report. You really should read it.

Uh, huh, I'm betting there are no declaratons for any of the signers, its' your "evidence", you know it, you check it out.

You're pulling my leg, right? This photo, of course. Where are you claiming the concrete and rebar was in relation to this structure?

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/879044f9a5254a103.jpg[/qimg]​

I guess you have no idea of how much garbage you forks create here.

The concrete is the dust. The rebar would be behind the rectangles formed by the interior box colums and the floor beams.

The shear wall is what is behind the interior box columns and floor beams in this alternate view of the spire. The rebar is in the center of the concrete.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=2942&stc=1&d=1157324574

 

[Class]

Uh, huh, I'm betting there are no declaratons for any of the signers, its' your evidence, you know it, you check it out.



I guess you have no idea of how much garbage you forks create here.

The concrete is the dust. The rebar would be behind the rectangles formed by the interior box colums and the floor beams.

The shear wall is what is behind the interior box columns and floor beams in this alternate view of the spire. The rebar is in the center of the concrete.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=2942&stc=1&d=1157324574

I have read this post and reread it numerous times and I still have no idea what you are trying to say.

 

[Christophera]

Thanks To Idiots WIth Computers Creating Garbage To Obscure Truths

Tell you what, summarise your question in a couple of sentences and I'll do my best to answer it.

I already did. These morons create so much garbage you lost track of it.

"Are you under the impression that columns that are assembled as segments can resist torsion? Are you under the impression that a 1300 foot steel member that is "assembled" can resist torsion. Are you under the impression that a 1300 foot piece of steel called a column can resist torsion better than 4 steel perimeter shear walls in a box shape?"

 

[Christophera]

I have read this post and reread it numerous times and I still have no idea what you are trying to say.

Thank those that configured the forum software and it's quoting capacities, or,....... you don't know wtf you are doing, or the forks that constantly post obsfucational garbage have obscured it for you.

 

[Pardalis]

Those "explosions" were simply compressed air escaping as the floors collapsed.

But isn't that the classical pancaking that NIST also rejects now ?

What does that have to do with it? The fire bursting out you saw was caused by the air being expelled by the initiating collapse. These were not explosions.

With this I mean a domino-effect transfers it's energy with a limited speed, it can not be faster than a free-fall speed, to be more mathematical the group speed of the effect vg cannot be larger than a point mass you drop, i.e. vg(t) <= v_free(t). If the ploom is part of the effect this is violated. If you have a set of vertical domino stones each stone (or group of stones) that hits the next one will be delayed a little bit, even if there is no structural resistance it will be delayed because of the laws of conservation of momentum and energy. If no explosives cause the ploom what then is the reason ? It's definitely no air, because it's gray *****. Therefore the effect is in fact faster than free fall.

OK, I had misread. Of course it wasn't faster than freefall, but it was pretty close to free-fall.

NIST agrees with near free-fall they estimated resp 11 and 9 seconds for WTC 1 and 2, but they based it on seismic data and video analysis.

On what other evidence could they evaluate the time of the collapse? (as if it had any importance in their analysis of the structural failure)

Alright then. It carried the load for 30 years and 50 minutes... I thought there is video evidence of sound of explosions before the first crunch.

I haven't seen any.

ETA: you probably mean this video, but it has already been debunked many times here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1512213#post1512213