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

Status
Not open for further replies.
^^ i dont see a core. All I see is a dark shadow in a cloud of dust. How anyone can see through that dust, must have xray freaking vision.

ETA . So have you bothered to contact those who were involved in the design and construction of said towers? Why dont you contact the real estate company that handled renting of the space within the towers. Im sure they have blue prints for every floor.
 
Christophera said:
Show me one that shows steel core columns at construction or otherwise and I will point out things about your image that reasonably show the image does not show what you think it shows.
Click to expand...

No you won't . You will simply waive it away like a gnat in your face. You are adept at that. There is no reason for me to show you anything because you have been shown it all in the course of this million post thread and ignored ALL of it.

Face it. You have nothing. Even those who believe 911 is an inside job think you are wrong. Everybody on either side of the issue thinks you are wrong.

You and only you (except perhaps those who champion the charming missile pod or hologram theories) believe what you believe, and you are tirelessly supporting an untenable position like a pit bull.

Sorry Chris. I really think you are not a bad guy. You'd probably be fun to have a couple beers with, in fact. But you are WRONG.
 
Ok, I realise that I come over and take a swipe at'em, from time to time!
How is it, that this is the 5,324th post, and he is still telling...the same joke?
Is this "The Aristocrat's"?
 
mortimer said:
What part of 'Your own site and drawings on your site cannot be accepted as evidence' do you not understand?
Click to expand...

Apparently you can not conduct comprehensive "reasoning". You have provided no adequate reasoning with consideration of the; missing plans, the missing steel, the 3 different sets of plans for the FEMA core, the incongruity/impossibility of explanation with the FEMA core of the event seen, no core columns seen in raw evidence which does show things that can really only be concrete.


The reason this thread is so long is because I won't give up what I know as fact and you will not reason in a comprehensive fashion.

Accordingly I'm changing my mind about the integrity of the Administration of JREF. Even though I feel they do not support my contentions, they realize that I am reasoning with evidence and you are not and so allow this thread to continue.

The thread goes on.
 
twinstead said:
No you won't . You will simply waive it away like a gnat in your face.
Click to expand...

Is that why I was able to take the dummies image from LC that repeatedly misinterpreted construction images, erroneously annotating them, analysing them, understanding them to the point where he ended up actually bringing me valuable evidence?

FOOTINGS OF THE CORE WALL

Is that why I was able to take Gravy's "proof" of steel core columns and made sense of it turning it into proof of the concrete core?

No. You are wrong. That is why things have gone as they have.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3527&stc=1&d=1160787866Or
 

Attachments

  • WTC2.coreariel.jpg
    WTC2.coreariel.jpg
    54.9 KB · Views: 3
Arus808 said:
the one being without reason, has been you.
Click to expand...

As far as I can tell you've done no reasoning of any kind, erroneous or otherwise. Peanut gallery.

On edit: Your recent post shows you have done erroneous reasoning.
 
Last edited:
Christophera said:
As far as I can tell you've done no reasoning of any kind, erroneous or otherwise. Peanut gallery.
Click to expand...

funny thats what your posts herer since day have shown.
nothing that i've posted or others here have posted are erroneous and not without reasoning.

Something tells me in your world, you see everything in the negative from own views.

If we say the sky is blue, you probably see it as orange.
 
Chris you rock on, my man. Rock on.

You will be wrong forever. Your 'theory' will never fly, and will be rejected by everybody on either side of the issue.

That, in my mind is the best rebuttal anyway. No more is needed.
 
Christophera said:
<snip>
no core columns seen in raw evidence which does show things that can really only be concrete.
</snip>
Click to expand...

no core columns? then wtf are these in the pic below? which by your own definition must be "raw evidence" as they are lifted from YOUR OWN SOURCE. where is the evidence of a concrete core in the pic below?

8748453043bd77e28.jpg


hung by your own petard methinks....

BV
 
Last edited:
bonavada said:
no core columns? then wtf are these in the pic below? which by your own definition must be "raw evidence" as they are lifted from YOUR OWN SOURCE. where is the evidence of a concrete core in the pic below?

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/8748453043bd77e28.jpg[/qimg]

hung by your own petard methinks....

BV
Click to expand...

I knew someone would come back with those series of images. I've dealt with this question probably 5 times in this thread.

The rectangles visible are of the same proportions as seen in the below aerial which show that the columns and beams you indicate are actually NOT IN THE CORE AREA. This image shows the interior box columns encircling the concrete core, core detonated, box columns falling, toppelling which is about the same time as the image you provided. No steel columns inside the core area.

It also matches exactly what Popeholden contributed. Pope, what is your soure BTW?

Quote: said:
The inner box at the core of each tower measured about 135 feet by 85 feet (41x26 m). Its 47 heavy steel columns surrounded a large open area housing elevators stairwells and restrooms.
Click to expand...


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3530&stc=1&d=1160793307
 

Attachments

  • interiorboxcolumnsarrow.jpg
    interiorboxcolumnsarrow.jpg
    46.7 KB · Views: 1
why are we encouraging this argument?! Any one with any sanity would realize that they were steel core buildings and 2 commercial jetliners caused its destruction. Don't encourage Christopheria!:mad:
 
Last edited:
Christophera said:
The rectangles visible are of the same proportions as seen in the below aerial which show that the columns and beams you indicate are actually NOT IN THE CORE AREA. This image shows the interior box columns encircling the concrete core, core detonated, box columns falling, toppelling which is about the same time as the image you provided. No steel columns inside the core area.
Click to expand...
so essentially what your saying is the concrete core was surrounded by steel columns, the core was blown up with enough force to turn all the concrete into dust, but it left the steel columns standing long enough for people to take pictures of?
 
defaultdotxbe said:
so essentially what your saying is the concrete core was surrounded by steel columns, the core was blown up with enough force to turn all the concrete into dust, but it left the steel columns standing long enough for people to take pictures of?
Click to expand...

Realize, that is WTC 1 and this is WTC 2. From what I can tell WTC 1 had problems with decay of some of the explosives and steel structure as well as concrete or rebar was left standing.

Yes, that would be the case. Optimally placed explosives that are well distributed will not seriously damage heavy structural steel which is immediately adjacent.

Now you are getting an idea of what it would take to cut 47, 1,300 foot steel columns into 40 foot pieces.

The interior box columns were cut with highly specialized cutting charges built into the floors
 
Christophera said:
Realize, that is WTC 1 and this is WTC 2. From what I can tell WTC 1 had problems with decay of some of the explosives and steel structure as well as concrete or rebar was left standing.
Click to expand...
so then what happened to it if the explosives failed?

Yes, that would be the case. Optimally placed explosives that are well distributed will not seriously damage heavy structural steel which is immediately adjacent.
Click to expand...
i thought they decayed? how is that optimal?

Now you are getting an idea of what it would take to cut 47, 1,300 foot steel columns into 40 foot pieces.
Click to expand...
1300 foot fall shoudl do the trick

The interior box columns were cut with highly specialized cutting charges built into the floors
Click to expand...
c4 isnt a specialised cutting charge
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom