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

[uruk]

Damm, brain damage with sociopathic tendencies. Stop hitting your head.


No excursions of changing the subject homer.

Reason now, .............. think bwain, bwain. You need evidence because I have evidence. Then you get to be reasonable.

That brownish gray material in the center of the perimeter columns is concrete.

The core of the top of tower 2 falls on WTC 3

Wow,you've ceased to make sense. You said you were using raw images. I called you out on your lie. You are using pictures that you down loaded from the internet missinterpreting them.
face it Chris. there were no concrete core. All the images show a steel collumn core. You look rediculous and pathic denying the obvious.

 

[Christophera]

Wow,you've ceased to make sense. You said you were using raw images. I called you out on your lie. You are using pictures that you down loaded from the internet missinterpreting them.
face it Chris. there were no concrete core. All the images show a steel collumn core. You look rediculous and pathic denying the obvious.

Oops, did I say RAW images, Sorry, I meant RAW evidence, or is file type more important infomation than information help explaining 3,000 murders?

http://algoxy.com/conc/core.html

 

[Christophera]

Oh, and I just noticed you haven't addressed this one either:


Please demonstrate you have grasped elementary research skills and post here for all to see (and state your source while you're at it):
1) Which floors had the skylobbies
2) Which floors had mechanical equipment

Selectivity and distraction. What bogus manipulation. Get real, get evidence, explain something.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html

 

[uruk]

That is the north face of the South tower. You do not know what you are looking at. I do. Light reflecting off the concrete core.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3472&stc=1&d=1160522839
​

Does anyone have the laughing dog smiley? oh well.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!

OH Jesus! Chris, That is the lamest attempt I have seen from you sofar.
That is not reflection from concrete The angle is wrong, not to mention the red lines on the right that represent the side of the core do not match the perspective of the building. You really are grasping at straws.

It's just pathetic

 

[Christophera]

Hi Christopera, can I get your take on this statement I made earlier? You started to reply, but then we got sidetracked on a discussion on the placement of the mechanical equipment and the overall stability of the tower.

Originally Posted by Blue Mountain on page 124 of this thread View Post
And there's no indication in the NIST report of a concrete core, either:

Originally Posted by NIST Report
Those core columns located in rentable and public spaces, closets, and mechanical shafts were enclosed in boxes of gypsum wallboard (and thus were inaccessible for inspection). The amount of gypsum enclosure in contact with the column varied depending on the location of the column within the core. (Page 73)
Indeed, all through the report is the assumption all the core columns were "exposed" and not encased in anything more substantial than gypsum wallboard. Considerable attention is paid to which columns were damaged and even severed by the impact of the aircraft. Such discussion would have been moot had there been a concrete core, and would have concentrated instead on how the aircraft damage would have affected the concrete walls.

In fact, had there been a concrete core, especially one 17' thick , would it not have served to protect the stairwells and elevators? If that were so, why did everyone above the impact zone in the north tower perish, and only a handful in the south tower escape?

The NIST language contradicts itself. Pure fiction. Says first columns were in rentable space, closets (true), and then says the columns were in the core.

HEY! It has got to be one way or the other, or it can't be both ways.

 

[alexg]

8x, explosion?

 

[Blue Mountain]

Selectivity and distraction. What bogus manipulation. Get real, get evidence, explain something.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html

Distraction, yes: I'm trying to get you to show people here you have even a single clue. It's a simple experiment, really, akin to flipping a light switch to see if the electricity is on. Answering my questions about floors that held the skylobby and mechanical equipment would show a couple of things:
1. You're willing to work with us instead of calling the whole lot of us names,
2. You are actually capable of locating references and getting information from them.

Now, if you wish to be belligerent, by all means go ahead. The room will empty out eventually, and no one will be left to argue with you.

 

[Blue Mountain]

Originally Posted by Blue Mountain on page 124 of this thread View Post
And there's no indication in the NIST report of a concrete core, either:

Originally Posted by NIST Report
Those core columns located in rentable and public spaces, closets, and mechanical shafts were enclosed in boxes of gypsum wallboard (and thus were inaccessible for inspection). The amount of gypsum enclosure in contact with the column varied depending on the location of the column within the core. (Page 73)
Indeed, all through the report is the assumption all the core columns were "exposed" and not encased in anything more substantial than gypsum wallboard. Considerable attention is paid to which columns were damaged and even severed by the impact of the aircraft. Such discussion would have been moot had there been a concrete core, and would have concentrated instead on how the aircraft damage would have affected the concrete walls.

In fact, had there been a concrete core, especially one 17' thick , would it not have served to protect the stairwells and elevators? If that were so, why did everyone above the impact zone in the north tower perish, and only a handful in the south tower escape?

The NIST language contradicts itself. Pure fiction. Says first columns were in rentable space, closets (true), and then says the columns were in the core.

HEY! It has got to be one way or the other, or it can't be both wats [sic].

While the part I quoted contains an apparent contradiction, the truth is one could have it both ways. The local elevators in each of the zones served by the skylobbies (about 33 floors in each zone) did not all encompass the entire zone. Some local elevators served only a few floors, others a few more. Only a fraction served the entire zone. On the floors above those elevators that served only part of the zone, the concrete floor slab was extended into the space where the elevators weren't, and this became rentable space. But the columns were still there, since they were needed to keep the building up.

Returning back to your concrete core, please now address this comment of mine:

In fact, had there been a concrete core, especially one 17' thick , would it not have served to protect the stairwells and elevators? If that were so, why did everyone above the impact zone in the north tower perish, and only a handful in the south tower escape?

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Christophera: Where are the construction workers who poured the concrete for your core?

i am going to keep bringing this up until you answer

 

[alexg]

Chris,
I thought I understood you to say the entire concrete core was laced with c4 - and that in this picture we see the lower section of core which was set to blow later than the upper. "uh . . delay system" If I recall your last answer. (ETA Althouigh I'm not sure if you were referring to entire core or just to this part) If so then when is it going to blow and could you supply some evidence of this explosion ever taking place.

 

[Christophera]

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/11835452bc52f3e976.gif[/qimg]

Chris,
I thought I understood you to say the entire concrete core was laced with c4 - and that in this picture we see the lower section of core which was set to blow later than the upper. "uh . . delay system" If I recall your last answer. (ETA Althouigh I'm not sure if you were referring to entire core or just to this part) If so then when is it going to blow and could you supply some evidence of this explosion ever taking place.

I've answered this question maybe 3 times in the last 6 pages.

There was 2 delays systems, one for the floors and one for the core. The lower core had a slower or less predictable fuse system and took a number of seconds to intitate. It was also safer and would not be inadvertantly detonated by a stray radio signal.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11corexplosions.html

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3478&stc=1&d=1160539723

 

[Christophera]

Christophera: Where are the construction workers who poured the concrete for your core?

i am going to keep bringing this up until you answer

1/3 are dead the rest are spead around America waiting for you to cease your obfuscations.

 

[alexg]

I've answered this question maybe 3 times in the last 6 pages.

There was 2 delays systems, one for the floors and one for the core. The lower core had a slower or less predictable fuse system and took a number of seconds to intitate. It was also safer and would not be inadvertantly detonated by a stray radio signal.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11corexplosions.html

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3478&stc=1&d=1160539723

It sounds like maybe you answered part 1. That yes, the purported object in the picture, of the core/cloud, of the South Tower, was rigged to blow. Correct?

You then show us a picture, apparently of the collapse of the north tower and it's cloud of smoke and debris. Which was not at all what I asked for, which was for a picture or other evidence of the explosion of the standing south tower core.

Are you suggesting that what I take to be the cloud of debris left in the air from the north tower collapse

is in fact, in part at least, the core blowing itself upwards? And that we are to assume that is also what happened to the south tower core?

 

[Christophera]

It sounds like maybe you answered part 1. That yes, the purported object in the picture, of the core/cloud, of the South Tower, was rigged to blow. Correct?

You then show us a picture, apparently of the collapse of the north tower and it's cloud of smoke and debris. Which was not at all what I asked for, which was for a picture or other evidence of the explosion of the standing south tower core.

Are you suggesting that what I take to be the cloud of debris left in the air from the north tower collapse [qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/11835452c72ff1d2c2.jpg[/qimg]

is in fact, in part at least, the core blowing itself upwards? And that we are to assume that is also what happened to the south tower core?

Oop's my mistake, but you've correctly interpreted it. The photograper of WTC 2 core did not catch that phase of 2. Correct, I posted the same event at about the same elevation for WTC 1.

Here is WTC 2 just before that which is shown happening to the north tower.

The core lower

 

[Belz...]

What you assert is not reasonable. The image of the WTC 2 core proves it. That dark form is not dust.

You haven't shown this yet. All you've done is ASSERT that it isn't dust. I'm saying that it could very well be. Other suggestions have also been made, but your only answer is "no, it's concrete" without support.

This reduces your credibility and sincerity.

 

[Belz...]

Recall, this is the internet and fakery is the norm.

That's an unsupported, sweeping generalisation if I ever heard one.

Accordingly, to separate myself from the fakes, I post raw images and use reason to impliment ALL of them with consistency.[/SIZE]

Again, those images aren't RAW.

No, but others have and those folks are not communicating.

You are welcome to try and see if they will act to reinforce the FEMA lie.

So is it your contention that you cannot possibly be shown wrong, no matter what, and that anyone who disagrees with you is automatically wrong, no matter what ?

completely unexplained by the steel core sheep that believe lies.

Or people like you, who manufacture them.

You need evidence because I have evidence.

If we need equal measures then this should be easy.

That is the north face of the South tower. You do not know what you are looking at. I do. Light reflecting off the concrete core.

Very funny. No way we could see the light through the "hallway" at this angle. Also, how you can distinguish between different "qualities" of light is baffling.

 

[Belz...]

1/3 are dead the rest are spead around America waiting for you to cease your obfuscations.

And you know this how ?

There was 2 delays systems, one for the floors and one for the core.

And you know this how ?

 

[defaultdotxbe]

1/3 are dead the rest are spead around America waiting for you to cease your obfuscations.

waiting just for me? i feel so important

anyway, you seem to keeping good tabs on them, why not interview a few, get some quotes about the concrete core so you have soemthign else to post besides those 2 pictures

 

[cloudshipsrule]

Christophera,

How many levels/floors of the towers were constructed between each pouring of the concrete core? In other words, did the concrete for the core get poured as each level was built, or did the concrete get poured for the core after every 5 or 10 or 15 stories of building were constructed?

 

[bonavada]

It's bogus. They don't even show the deception in the little clip you linked to. I saved the bold attempt at deception. If it were not bogus we would see that same structure here ad we do not.

WHAT'S BOGUS?
1/ the whole nova film?
or
2/ do you just refer to the below .jpg you link to?

if the latter, i already explained that nova superimposed that graphic (to clarify a point that the structural engineer was making) over footage of the core collapsing (which i also think maybe the culprit for the "clouded shadow" in the pic you keep spamming this thread with)
if the former then there really is no hope for your theory, and you are into the realms of unfalisfyability and no-one with any amount of intellect will buy it.

i am beginning to suspect that the main reason christophera continues to attempt to propagate his extremley dubious, offensive theory is to bump up the hits to his ill-informed site. he can then boast to the rest of the like-minded community of the hits generated by this method. just a little theory of my own but there you go, prove me wrong easily by hosting all the images you spam here on the jref servers.

BV
Swansea Wales UK

<grammatical edit>