• 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:
In 1990 I saw the best documentation besides the construction plans. A very intimate video documentary produced by BBC called "The Construction Of the twin Towers". It was 2 hours in length and mostly about the concrete core because it was the most difficult aspect of the construction.
Click to expand...

Never paid much attention to this thread b4. I remember a doc airing with the same title. Don't believe it was BBC, could be wrong. The whole first hour of it was indeed about problems and concrete. The bathtub like retaining walls, is what they talked about being a nitemare. River a stones throw away,size of holes needed without disturbing surrounding buildings, etc...
None of this other stuff though, maybe he has confused the retaining walls, for a core.
/my.02
 
Dog Town said:
Never paid much attention to this thread b4. I remember a doc airing with the same title. Don't believe it was BBC, could be wrong. The whole first hour of it was indeed about problems and concrete. The bathtub like retaining walls, is what they talked about being a nitemare. River a stones throw away,size of holes needed without disturbing surrounding buildings, etc...
None of this other stuff though, maybe he has confused the retaining walls, for a core.
/my.02
Click to expand...

That's what we figured a few pages ago. Since I've seen the OTHER, very interesting documentary here, I can only summise that chris is confused between the "bathtub" of the WTC complex and the core itself.
 
StoneWT said:
If a pixel covers 3 feet and an object is 3 inches (12-to-1), the object isn't going to show up. Christophera, I'm shocked that you don't understand this basic rule that even a middle school student would be familiar with. Is your life so meaningless that you are driven to create fake letters, documentaries, and dictionary passages? Place the 3,000 victims ahead of your desire for self-esteem.
Click to expand...

I addressed the resolution of the pictures back in post 917. He/She won't listen

Dave_46 said:
That image shows a wide view, and I have tried to make an estimate of the width of the view at the distance of the collapse. My estimate is that it is at least 600 ft. Assuming this, and noting that the image is 400 pixels wide, I make that 1.5 ft per pixel. How can we see 3" reinforcing bar, it will only be 1/6 of a pixel wide. Your 4' centres would be what? 2.5 pixels. The resolution is not good enough to show that detail.

Dave
Click to expand...

Dave
 
Dave,

He is using CTs as a substitute for a social life. I've seen a lot of people pontificate on theories in order to make up for a lack of social skills and education. He HAS to continue spewing his idiocy because to quit would be to look himself in the mirror and see himself as just a plain, ordinary joe. He wouldn't see the brilliant theorist of his imagination that is BETTER than a trained psychologist. He would see a bitter, hate-filled shmuck driven to mock the 3,000 victims of 9/11.
 
I guess I'm two years out of time then and indeed have to do more homework before the conclusions,
if I compare this
(replace - by / and -- by ://)
http--img518.imageshack.us-img518-6392-whatthenj1.jpg
it's a different position of course but how can we draw conclusions if one positions a camera
and only sends out the part where it looks like the red lines imply two buildings. At least
one of them is fake then or both. I'm emberassed, you folks must have had some ROLF and LOL.
This is a bad way of presenting alternative theories, how the hell can
he say it was 09:30 in the morning then before the collapse (is it a lie or was he disinformed), thank you mr Vonkleist
I went through some material a friend gave me and I now just found his own reaction, but then
he shows a different helicopter view and some other smoke. Another 0 score from Krankensteen
and humble apologizes
 
Last edited:
Oh yeah, the reason that I came here is that I'm at some other boards and believed in alternate 911 things for 75%, I think it's good to look seriously at the other views, just like politics.. you guys turned me to 50%
 
Excellent news, Einsteen. It is rare for a CT to think for themselves, they usuall follow the CT herd. Here's a heads up for you: the list of liars in the "truth" movement is very long.
 
Ok but there are some things that are still open questions. Is it also not a little bit true that CTs pop-up because the puzzle is not yet completed ?
 
einsteen said:
Is it also not a little bit true that CTs pop-up because the puzzle is not yet completed ?
Click to expand...

The fact that there are CTists out there is not a proof that something is a miss in the 9/11 events, if that is what you are saying. It's only a proof that humankind can be very stupid sometimes.
 
einsteen said:
Ok but there are some things that are still open questions. Is it also not a little bit true that CTs pop-up because the puzzle is not yet completed ?
Click to expand...
There are always open questions about any event in history, but conspiracy theorists rarely address genuine questions. Rather than investigating things with an open mind, they decide what they believe is true and work backward. In my opinion, these conspiracy theories say more about the theorist than they say about the object of the theory.
 
einsteen said:
Ok but there are some things that are still open questions. Is it also not a little bit true that CTs pop-up because the puzzle is not yet completed ?
Click to expand...

Many things leave unanswered questions. This does not automatically mean conspiracy.

Many CT's appear becuase there are people that are distrustful or paranoid. They WANT an alternative to things that are otherwise easily and logically explained.
 
Einsteen:

Good news, that you are open to examining the evidence, critically analyzing it, and drawing your own conclusions. Make sure you maintain this attitude, for the CTers will try to persuade you with their song and dance.

If you are ever presented with evidence that you cannot understand, or flies in the face of your reason, seek out Solid Evidence and logical explanations, and you will do just fine.

TAM
 
einsteen said:
...Is it also not a little bit true that CTs pop-up because the puzzle is not yet completed ?
Click to expand...

Hi einsteen. I agree it is a little bit true -- but only a little. I think it's more true to say that CTs pop up because some people, for a variety of reasons that have been discussed elsewhere in this forum, need to believe in them. So they begin with a conclusion (their first and biggest mistake) and then look for whatever shreds of evidence can be put forth to arguably support that conclusion. Sometimes the results are sort of reasonable, or at least coherent (e.g. Churchill knew about Pearl Harbor beforehand but said nothing so the U.S. would join WWII). Most times, it's total nonsense (e.g. the Moon Landing hoax). 9/11 CTs, in my opinion, fall very much in the latter category.
 
Last edited:
Ok, I refer to some stuff I found recently, for example questions 1,3,6,12,14 from
http--911research.wtc7.net-reviews-nist-WTC_FAQ_reply.html
And then there are all those other things (too many) like the 5 frames of the thing that hits the
pentagon near the ground. Show the vaporized plane or whatever it was and the CT'ers have
no ground. What's so secret about it, we are allowed to see pictures from inside why not a video
of da plane, da plane. I'm sure there must be more video evidence of what happened, i guess if I walk
there with a toothpick they notice me.

ps. I wish I never started with the 911 thing, I don't sleep very well last time
 
Christophera said:
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?"
Click to expand...

Your question doesn't make sense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom