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

Status
Not open for further replies.
I swear there were no spaces in there earlier. It's a conspiracy!!! Someone is deliberately spacing his question marks!!!!

Do ya think ?
 
A CT´ist hacked his account here and the empty space before the question marks is a symbol that represents their evidence.
 
zaayrdragon said:
I swear there were no spaces in there earlier. It's a conspiracy!!! Someone is deliberately spacing his question marks!!!!

Do ya think ?
Click to expand...
only an admin could do it without an "edit by" tag.....i blame Lisa Simpson (for obvious reasons)
 
defaultdotxbe said:
only an admin could do it without an "edit by" tag.....i blame Lisa Simpson (for obvious reasons)
Click to expand...

Pah, the NWO could do this, too :D - or if someone is fast enough to edit a message. I guess in the first 5 minutes you can edit them without "edit"-tag.
 
Christophera said:
Well, ................. you did not explain WHY the supposed steel core columns are not seen in the images. If you are going to support the 47, 1,300 foot steel columns as having existed in the core area of the towers, you must explain WHY they are not seen in the photos.

There was no artifacting that was problematic in the image.

All you have succeeded in doing is damaging the image and you rannotations are unreadable.

Yes, I have seen the BS reverse logic speculation attempted as a way of supporting the steel core columns by saying that IF the tower had a concrete core it wouldn't have fallen. Here is the worst of that. "The Freedom Tower will have a concrete core so it will not collapse."

You are gullible and failng to use hard evidence and instead using "whatever" which also has no support in hard evidence.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I over compressed the image to meet thr image size restriction.
I did not change anything in the image other than increase the contrast to compensate for the dust cloud. and to add my notations.

The added notes are:
1. 52 inches - 4.3 feet (concerning the width of the coulmn)
2. These bar have to be at least 10 inches thick (in comaprison to the column)
3. The area pointed is less than 17 feet (concerning the area pointed out by Chris)
4.Note the difference in contrast in areas obscured by the dust cloud. (showing that what Chris thinks is a surface is actually a combination of JPEG artifacting and diffusion caused by the dust cloud in the foreground)
5. Note "holes" and debris (to further show that the area pointed out by Chris is not a wall)

The other columns are not visible because they are already collapsed or obscured by the debris.
 
Here is your core, Chris:

111074527cc981b7df.jpg


Source:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/slagheap/sets/72057594112589148/?page=2

NO CONCRETE, SEE? NO NO NO NO NO NO NO! :D
 
Christophera said:
The supposed steel core columns were of the strongest elements of the towers. They would not have been torn away. Look at the interior box columns, the ONLY columns that were full length structural elements.

columns cut level
Click to expand...

Chris, the picture You posted shows the interior support columns. And if you notice they are only slightly smaller than the perimiter box columns Just like it was stated in all the Material that has been brought to your attention
 

Attachments

  • WTC1int.box.col_noted.jpg
    WTC1int.box.col_noted.jpg
    69.8 KB · Views: 11
alexg said:
That pretty well does it! No concrete, plenty steel, plenty debris. Surely this will lay this matter to rest:D :D :D
Click to expand...

*lol* You don´t know him - i bet he will see nothing else but concrete cores on the image... :D
 
Oliver said:
*lol* You don´t know him - i bet he will see nothing else but concrete cores on the image... :D
Click to expand...


Chris will no doubt soldier on. I wonder how he swill spin it this time? No doubt all that 'concrete' we saw in the other view is on the far side and out of view in the hi-res pic. That's a given. ETA How he'll see 17 feet of it though is beyond me. Whatever is hanging over there on the far side could be no more than a few feet thick, AT MOST, it's probably just a piece of sheet rock, a few inches thick, if it's anything at all.

ETA Chris never has explained how the window cleaner tunneled through 17 feet of concrete with his squeegee.

As I see it Chris will always KNOW there was a concrete core because he has a memory of seeing and hearing all about one in the non-existent PBS documentary he saw years ago.
 
Last edited:
Belz... said:
Just because you can't determine what it is doesn't mean it's what you THINK it is. Ever thought of that ?



The picture's a mess, chris. We can't make out anything.



So, what ? How many floors had free-standing, non-reinforced concrete ?



Cable.



Steel doesn't bend ?



I don't think he cares. YOU'RE in construction and you don't know this.



But he DID explain that there's no concrete in there.

Even if you DID see concrete in the images, don't forget that the floors were made of reinforced concrete, so chances are you'll see that in the aftermath pictures.



Just like flight recorders are made from the most resilient material known to man ?? Come on. Just because they were the strongest element doesn't mean they can't be torn away.
Click to expand...

Belz,

Grasping at straws.

I know exactly what that block of gray material with roundede corners is. It is the core wall at its base. YOU are the one that thinks there were steel core columns in the core. Well, ......... we don't see those.


YOU will not explain why they are not seen. I say the gray block is concrete, YOU say not. I ask you a reasonable question, "If it is not concrete what is it?" and you try to confuse the situation as if I do not know what it is.

EVASION.

The picture reveals many things, you just do not want to see them.

There was NO un reinforced concrete in the skyscraper, even you should know that.

So, you think the tower had 6 inch diameter cable in it? Bwahhhhhaaaaaa.

No, steel does not bend like that. Steel is not used like that when it is in that situation.

True, homer doesn't care but WRONG, I do know what the different building material look like as they come apart.

Homer didn't and never has explained anything. All he has actually done recently is over compressed an image to fit it into this boards restrictive image posting criteria.

We don't see any floors either.

All 47 torn away? And the interior box columns stay.

Wrong on all points. The interio box columns were the only fulllength columns in the towers and they have all fallen away in this imge to reveal the concrete core.
 
HOMERS MISREPRESENTATION: manipulation

uruk said:
Chris, the picture You posted shows the interior support columns. And if you notice they are only slightly smaller than the perimiter box columns Just like it was stated in all the Material that has been brought to your attention
Click to expand...


Those are elevator guide rails or elevator landing support. Note they are not cut square and level as were the interior box columns on the left.

The columns cut level
 
Oliver said:
Here is your core, Chris:

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/111074527cc981b7df.jpg[/qimg]

Source:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/slagheap/sets/72057594112589148/?page=2

NO CONCRETE, SEE? NO NO NO NO NO NO NO! :D
Click to expand...

Belz said it well Oliver, describing your picture.

Belz said:
The picture's a mess, chris. We can't make out anything.
Click to expand...

Although I can see some leaning interior box columns and elevator guide rails still mostly intact.

The biggest problem for your group is that the steel core columns you say existed NEVER show up at elevation in the core area. We do see what can only be rebar.

3" REBAR ON 4' CENTERS

We do see what can only be concrete for the core of WTC 2.

core


We do see Concrete shear wall to left of interior box column, the "spire" but we see no steel core columns inside the core.
 
alexg said:
How'd the window cleaner tunnel out of the elevator shaft Chris?
Click to expand...

The elevator shafts had at least 2 walls that were drywall, most had 3 or 4.

Meaning a squeegee will get you out if you go the right direction in the right elevator shaft. There was an account of a effort to cut through the drywall that met with concrete after getting through drywall. It was in a stairway tho.
 
There was an account of a effort to cut through the drywall that met with concrete after getting through drywall. It was in a stairway tho.
Click to expand...

Can you link us to it, or was it on the documentary you saw 15 years ago?
 
Christophera said:
The elevator shafts had at least 2 walls that were drywall, most had 3 or 4.

Meaning a squeegee will get you out if you go the right direction in the right elevator shaft. There was an account of a effort to cut through the drywall that met with concrete after getting through drywall. It was in a stairway tho.
Click to expand...
Sounds like this concrete core was everywhere but wherever we have looked for it. Frankly I don't believe there just happened to be drywall put in round an elevator shaft and concrete everywhere else. I need to see the account you mention of getting blocked by concrete in a shaft to believe it. I can believe somebody got trapped in a shaft and assumed the drywall was impenetrable, lacking a squeegee to tunnel with.

eta sorry, misunderstood the story about the stairwell escape, would like to see the story though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom