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

[Skylark]

Or, you know, you could completely ignore the link I posted which even shows photos of a cross section of a core column (one of the 44-47 used in the entire core structure) - made completely, 100% FROM STEEL.

You know, ignoring evidence is a good way to prove your argument, isn't it?

You have yet to post proof that there is in fact this "concrete core" which is the basis of your theory. (You know, that theory that the buildings fell at "free fall" speeds, which I already proved they didn't.)

Since you continue to ignore evidence I will continue to ignore your posts (which seem to consist of the same thing every time you post). Arguing with a CT isn't so annoying if they don't cling to their argument despite it being debunked over and over and over.

 

[bob_kark]

I consider your rebuke to my questioning you loyalty to the principles of our nation to be sincere. Meaning truth and justice are also valued, meaning you might be up the challenge of doing something important to save it.



You've got it, then you twist away from it.

Structural steel during failure is very distinct. When we see it at the WTC, we can see what it is if one knows what its distinct characteristces are. In the absense of those characteristics we must look to what characteristics other matreials have that could survive the tousands of tons of steel crashing over it have. Seek to identify those in the decomposing structure in order to discern the material.

Now we must conside the possibilities. Lets trya few things other than concrete to see how they fits.

Wood: Check the history of wooden towers.
Stone: Definately masonry and it is stated the towers had none. cast concrete is not often called masonry in engineering and archcitecture. Check the history of stone towers.

Aluminum: Check the history of aluminum towers.
Fibeglass: Check the history of fiberglass towers.

We all have common knowledge to know that those materials just arn't used for towers.

CONCRETE: Square cast concrete corners will develop larger radius gently rounded corners with erosive forces.

Thank you Christophera, I'm glad you appreciate the fact that I do love my country, as I'm sure you do.

Thank you as well for bringing up distinct characteristics of different building materials. I've taken the liberty of finding several pictures of collapsed concrete buildings. I'm sorry in advance for the great number of pictures:

Now, besides the fact that none of these buildings have completely collapsed, I'm seeing a common theme in each of these pictures. It has to do with the structure itself rather than the collapse. Do you notice how none of he hallways are created completely out of concrete? Instead they use reinforced concrete pillars as a support to create the building.

In fact, I've been unable to find a single high-rise concrete building that used any other method. In addition, in each of these high-rise concrete building, the reinforced concrete pillars are spaced apart from each other by quite a distance. Instead of forming a square as your pictures seem to, they form a rectangle which is far more wide than tall.

In addition, I was unable to find a collapse where the reinforced concrete pillars stood up on their own. In each collapse I was able to view, they had a tendency to tip over with the floor above them rather than to stand straight on their own. So, at this point, it actually appears to me that the structure in the pictures you provided actually does not follow the characteristics of a reinforced concrete structure.

Now, you stated that the structure in your pictures do not share the characteristics of a steel structure. What characteristics are you referring to?

 

[uruk]

Christophera invested a lot of time, money, and self-confidence in this belief of his. He is going to ignore any evidence which goes against his beliefs.

He is quite simply a dellusional fanatic. There is no amount of fact or evidence that is going to sway him. Everybody here has shown him multitudes of pictures and diagrams, some even from his own site, that show unequivacly and without any doubt how the core is constructed. Yet he still ignores all that mountain of data based soley on three fuzzy and obscured pictures. Does that sound like the actions of an intellectually honest or possibly even stable person?

You be the judge.

 

[Belz...]

Maybe the Chewbacca defense will work.

 

[Oliver]

I consider your rebuke to my questioning you loyalty to the principles of our nation to be sincere. Meaning truth and justice are also valued, meaning you might be up the challenge of doing something important to save it.



You've got it, then you twist away from it.

Structural steel during failure is very distinct. When we see it at the WTC, we can see what it is if one knows what its distinct characteristces are. In the absense of those characteristics we must look to what characteristics other matreials have that could survive the tousands of tons of steel crashing over it have. Seek to identify those in the decomposing structure in order to discern the material.

Now we must conside the possibilities. Lets trya few things other than concrete to see how they fits.

Wood: Check the history of wooden towers.
Stone: Definately masonry and it is stated the towers had none. cast concrete is not often called masonry in engineering and archcitecture. Check the history of stone towers.

Aluminum: Check the history of aluminum towers.
Fibeglass: Check the history of fiberglass towers.

We all have common knowledge to know that those materials just arn't used for towers.

CONCRETE: Square cast concrete corners will develop larger radius gently rounded corners with erosive forces.

2001 = Dead End

2006 = Dead End

.
.
.
.
.

2047 = Dead End

 

[chipmunk stew]

2001 = Dead End

2006 = Dead End

.
.
.
.
.

2047 = Dead End

2067 = Dead. With nothing to show for it.

 

[alexg]

Christophera invested a lot of time, money, and self-confidence in this belief of his. He is going to ignore any evidence which goes against his beliefs.

He is quite simply a dellusional fanatic. There is no amount of fact or evidence that is going to sway him. Everybody here has shown him multitudes of pictures and diagrams, some even from his own site, that show unequivacly and without any doubt how the core is constructed. Yet he still ignores all that mountain of data based soley on three fuzzy and obscured pictures. Does that sound like the actions of an intellectually honest or possibly even stable person?

You be the judge.

I'll second that. This is his GREAT CONTRIBUTION to society, his life's meaning, he's WAY out on a limb on this! I'm no psychiatrist but I'm thinking the only hope is that some tragic event - divorce, job loss for example - may have brought on this episode and that a lot of time might bring a very slow return to sanity. I hope he's not on any non-prescribed drugs. If you are Chris just stop. Come back to us.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Demonstratons of logic showing the shape of the WTC 2 core can only be concrete will require you brain to ba active and your heart large enough to care about Amrica enough to use logic.

I will only say this once. Please, never insinuate that I do not care about my country. That's a very low blow and is completely uncalled for.

I consider your rebuke to my questioning you loyalty to the principles of our nation to be sincere. Meaning truth and justice are also valued...

So says the admitted liar.

Sorry, Mr. Brown. The high road is not yours to claim.

 

[Christophera]

Thank you Christophera, I'm glad you appreciate the fact that I do love my country, as I'm sure you do.

Thank you as well for bringing up distinct characteristics of different building materials. I've taken the liberty of finding several pictures of collapsed concrete buildings. I'm sorry in advance for the great number of pictures:

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/6327451933616aa0f.gif[/qimg]

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/63274519336171383.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/632745193499ecc20.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/63274519349a2d576.jpg[/qimg]

Now, besides the fact that none of these buildings have completely collapsed, I'm seeing a common theme in each of these pictures. It has to do with the structure itself rather than the collapse. Do you notice how none of he hallways are created completely out of concrete? Instead they use reinforced concrete pillars as a support to create the building.

In fact, I've been unable to find a single high-rise concrete building that used any other method. In addition, in each of these high-rise concrete building, the reinforced concrete pillars are spaced apart from each other by quite a distance. Instead of forming a square as your pictures seem to, they form a rectangle which is far more wide than tall.

In addition, I was unable to find a collapse where the reinforced concrete pillars stood up on their own. In each collapse I was able to view, they had a tendency to tip over with the floor above them rather than to stand straight on their own. So, at this point, it actually appears to me that the structure in the pictures you provided actually does not follow the characteristics of a reinforced concrete structure.

Now, you stated that the structure in your pictures do not share the characteristics of a steel structure. What characteristics are you referring to?

You have correctly noted the characteristics of steel reinforced concrete columns and that they will not stand on their own. The steel reinforced concrete core of the Twin Towers was not the single narrow column repeated and tied together with floors. It was a single tubular rectangle with concrete shear wall construction on four sides with a 80 x 120 foot ID. The interior box columns surrounded it and fastened to it imparting the shear resistence of the concrete and the resistence to torsion of such a tube to the steel so the steel was able to take maximum loads. The core would have stood on its own but the scaffolding to build it constitutes the floors, so just leave the scaffold up 'cause you don't need elevators to nowhere. The tube is cast inside the scaffold frame.

This represents WTC 1, 2 was different.

diagram of hallways and interior wall of the WTC 1 steel reinforced concrete core

 

[Christophera]

Here are the pictures of the steel columns in the core structre of the WTC

These pictures show that the sipres in your pictures are the steel support structures in the core of the building. Look closely at the size and spacing

http://www.terrorize.dk/911/images/w...truction.1.jpg
http://www.newsday.com/media/photo/2002-05/3121225.jpg

In the first picture notice the color of the concrete on the floor section, now note the color of veretical support beam. concrete-white, steel-dark

Your first link no workee. Second link not show what you say. U dummie.

 

[Christophera]

Christophera invested a lot of time, money, and self-confidence in this belief of his. He is going to ignore any evidence which goes against his beliefs.

He is quite simply a dellusional fanatic. There is no amount of fact or evidence that is going to sway him. Everybody here has shown him multitudes of pictures and diagrams, some even from his own site, that show unequivacly and without any doubt how the core is constructed. Yet he still ignores all that mountain of data based soley on three fuzzy and obscured pictures. Does that sound like the actions of an intellectually honest or possibly even stable person?

You be the judge.

Multitudes of pictures and diagrams? Mountain of data?

You are exagerating and really have no evidence that is not deeply in question, whatsoever or you would have posted it

Here is hard evidence. No room for deception.

http://concretecore.741.com

 

[qarnos]

Here is hard evidence. No room for deception.

http://concretecore.741.com

I don't think you are trying to deceive us Christopher, but I think you are deceiving yourself.

Read this speech from by Richard Feynman. The quote in my signature is taken from this and illustrates what I am trying to say.

 

[Belz...]

You have correctly noted the characteristics of steel reinforced concrete columns and that they will not stand on their own. The steel reinforced concrete core of the Twin Towers was not the single narrow column repeated and tied together with floors. It was a single tubular rectangle with concrete shear wall construction on four sides with a 80 x 120 foot ID. The interior box columns surrounded it and fastened to it imparting the shear resistence of the concrete and the resistence to torsion of such a tube to the steel so the steel was able to take maximum loads. The core would have stood on its own but the scaffolding to build it constitutes the floors, so just leave the scaffold up 'cause you don't need elevators to nowhere. The tube is cast inside the scaffold frame.

And you remember all this from 15 years ago ?

 

[GlennB]

Multitudes of pictures and diagrams? Mountain of data?

You are exagerating and really have no evidence that is not deeply in question, whatsoever or you would have posted it

Here is hard evidence. No room for deception.

http://concretecore.741.com

Christopher - this a very personal question I know and I'm not really expecting an answer, but have you ever been diagnosed with an Autistic Spectrum Disorder? Asperger's Syndrome perhaps?

 

[Oliver]

Christopher - this a very personal question I know and I'm not really expecting an answer, but have you ever been diagnosed with an Autistic Spectrum Disorder? Asperger's Syndrome perhaps?

Maybe it´s just a Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder?

The prevalence among children is estimated to be in the range of 5% to 8% in children, and 4% to 8% in adults

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention-deficit_hyperactivity_disorder

 

[Skibum]

Maybe it´s just a Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention-deficit_hyperactivity_disorder

I seriously doubt its anything as simple as ADHD by itself. IMO the man is certifiably insane.

 

[Lothian]

Wow, 86 pages, excuse me for not reading them all. I am not sure if this has been suggested yet but perhaps the fall of the towers was in some way connected to the aeroplanes that crashed into them.*






*Unless I have totally misunderstood and it was caused by Frodo throwing the one ring into the inferno at Mount Doom.

 

[uruk]

Multitudes of pictures and diagrams? Mountain of data?

You are exagerating and really have no evidence that is not deeply in question, whatsoever or you would have posted it

Here is hard evidence. No room for deception.

http://concretecore.741.com

In the picture on you your own website you show a picture from the construction of the WTC. You have erroneously (and without evidence I might add) labeled some of the core coulmns as "elevator rail guides". They are not elevator rail guides. They are far too large to be elevator rail guides.
Look here for an example of elevator guide rails. Take notice of the size of the rails in relation to people and other structures.:
http://www.eltecelevator.com/imgs/diagram.jpg
http://india.thyssenkruppelevator.com.cn/india/product/elevator.asp

also notice the WTC elevators in relation to your "elevator rail guides"
Most of the elevators are not adjacent to the columns that labled as "rail guides":
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/wtc_ch2.htm#fig-2-1
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...Design_with_Floor_and_Elevator_Arrangment.jpg

Hey, how about showing me evidence that those columns are elevator rail guides from some place other than your site. You know, back it up with corroberating evidence.

Naa, this is just a waste of time. Your just going to ignore all this stuff.

 

[Brainache]

Wow, 86 pages, excuse me for not reading them all. I am not sure if this has been suggested yet but perhaps the fall of the towers was in some way connected to the aeroplanes that crashed into them.*






*Unless I have totally misunderstood and it was caused by Frodo throwing the one ring into the inferno at Mount Doom.

Come on, we all know it was Gollum who fell into the fire after biting off Frodo's finger with the ring that caused the tower to collapse. The ring was obviously a transmitter to set of the gaspipe explosives in the black tower.

If only Sauron hadn't used that C4 coated rebar in the concrete core at Barad Dur....

 

[einsteen]

Wow, 86 pages, excuse me for not reading them all. I am not sure if this has been suggested yet but perhaps the fall of the towers was in some way connected to the aeroplanes that crashed into them.

That's indeed how the human brain works. First we have an event, then another event. There is a correlation between the events. There is a chance that the second event has a causal relation with the first one, this chance was near zero, but that day the impossible happened.
And once this idea has been absorbed into the brain it will never get out of that brain, especially not when it happened two times on the same day.
We saw it ourselves didn't we! Even smart people are tricked by this shock effect and become dull, journalists change into media whores and scientists work under the assumption of the pancake collapse. There is no proof of a complete steel frame that is deformed. It was completely intact except at the floors of impact. But I swear one day the truth will be revealed.