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

[Bell]

Got any examples of that aside from the WTC ?

<snip>

Not even the WTC is an example

 

[cloudshipsrule]

Hmmm. Can't resist but to take a stab.......

I found this while searching for the truth on the Internet. I feel that this site is very credible because they really don't make a lot of pop ups come up on your screen, and their site name is registered and stuff. When I read this letter I new it was true because it reminded me of another letter I read that was true from some other people who also want to know the truth.

From cbell-errors@mx.lodo.infobeat.com Mon Mar 24 15:29:00 1997
Return-Path: cbell-errors@mx.lodo.infobeat.com
Received: from key-colony.merc.com (key-colony.merc.com [207.79.9.133]) by mta0.yahoomail.com (8.0.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AX08764 for <****@yahoomail.com>; Mon, 24 Mar 1997 15:28:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tahiti.prod.merc.com (cbell-errors@mx.lodo.merc.com) by tahiti.prod.merc.com (version 3.23, queueup copyright InfoBeat, Inc. 1996,1997) with stdio id AAJVI18872; Mon, 24 Mar 1997 16:30:23 MST
Message-Id: <******@tahiti.merc.com>
To: ****@yahoo.com
Subject: Finance - Full Closing Bell @ 08/20/97 (1 stories)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html
From: InfoBeat <finance@infobeat.com> Add to Address Book
Priority: normal
Errors-To: finance-errors@mx.lodo.infobeat.com
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 17:43:03 MDT
Content-Length: ****


Sept 13, 2001 12:14:46pm

Dear Uncle Pete and Aunt Marie,


I know you know what happened two days ago in New York. I'm still shaking thinking about it. In school yesterday a lot of us were talking about the World Trade Center complex, and we decided to build a scale model using toothpicks and common, elementary-school-grade Elmers. We thought this would be a great project for our architectural drawing class. My worst fears were realized when the burning Weeble-Wobble plastic, plane we launched into the toothpick towers failed to bring the towers down after impact. Now it is clear to me that 9/11 was a plot by our own government, and it sickens me.

You see, As I understand it, EPA proposes to establish a WTC signature of a combination of slag
wool, concrete, and gypsum. If and when this signature is validated, its presence would
then serve as an indicator that a sampled space had been impacted by the collapse of
the towers on 9/11. Contaminants of potential concern (COPCs) that are also found to
be present would be presumed to be WTC-derived. Absence of the signature
components would serve as an indicator that a sampled space had not been impacted.
COPCs found to be present would then be presumed to not be of WTC derivation.
Presence of the WTC signature will also be used to determine the geographic extent of
remaining WTC contaminants, if any.
This signature proposal, in my view, is based upon a number of key assumptions:
a. It is assumed that signature components (slag wool, concrete, and gypsum) were
dispersed to every geographic area that was impacted by the collapse of the
towers and entered every indoor space that was impacted by the collapse of the
towers.
b. It is assumed that signature components were dispersed to every geographic
area that was impacted by the activities, routes, and locations of debris removal
and waste transfer operations and entered every indoor space that was impacted
by the activities, routes, and locations of debris removal and waste transfer
operations.
c. It is assumed that signature components were dispersed to every geographic
area that was impacted by combustion byproducts in the plume that emanated
from Ground Zero fires and entered every indoor space that was impacted by
combustion byproducts.
d. It is assumed that signature components that entered indoor spaces did not
become separated from other WTC substances, including COPCs, by transport
or by activities that resulted in disturbance.
e. It is assumed that signature components that entered indoor spaces did not
become separated from other WTC substances, including COPCs, over time.
It is my opinion that for a signature to be validated, these assumptions must also be
proved to be valid. EPA does not propose any of these assumptions for testing or proof.
EPA proposes only to prove that it can identify WTC-derived slag wool, in combination
with concrete and gypsum, and that laboratory analysis is capable of distinguishing and
quantifying samples containing these constituent substances.
Efforts to establish a combustion signature have been abandoned. Consequently, the
EPA draft final sampling proposal includes no provision for identifying or cleaning indoor
spaces, if any, that may have been impacted by the combustion plume and that may
have residual WTC contaminants as a result. (PAHs will be sampled but in the absence
of a dust signature will not be cleaned.)
So you see, I can't help but think that we have been lied to.

Love,
billy

 

[Christophera]

While the website is yet another effort by the unstoppable Chris Brown, the usenet postings he has quoted are authentic.

Go to http://groups.google.com and enter the following text into the search box:

3BAD5E05.F5A92E1E

Here is a link to the thread found by the search. (The link's not guaranteed to work; the result may be specific to my search due to cookies sent to my browser by Google.)

With respect to the concrete core mentioned in the Usenet post, I'd like to make the following observations:

• The writer is an architect, not a construction engineer
• He studied the towers in school, but I have no idea how many years prior to 2001 that was
• He never mentioned visiting the WTC, so he may not have physically seen the building. He certainly never saw it while it was being built.
• He was writing under stress (he indicates he's angry) - this was only six days after the towers fell

So while the letter says "concrete core", there's nothing to indicate the writer of the letter was close enough to the design and construction to state that with authority. It's not even hearsay evidence.

Chris, the letter is useless as evidence for your mythical concrete core.

I'll repeat that to ensure you don't miss it

The letter is useless as evidence for your mythical concrete core.

The letter I have quoted is more useful than the entire WTC report because it is consistent with the images showing the concrete core
.

 

[Christophera]

What's "raw" evidence, chris ?

I've already answered that.

Only your government can "censor" your information.

Wrong, anybody with power over publishing can.

Very convenient. To you, lack of evidence is actually evidence in your favour. You can't lose.

Wen statements are inconsistent with raw evidence they do not qualify for usage.

But that statement contradicts your claim, chris.

Yes, and I explained it.

 

[Christophera]

Um, Chris,

Isn't this the exact opposite of what you have been postulating for years now? You say that the steel was constructed several floors ahead of the concrete, and that is why this imaginary concrete core of yours is not visible in the hundreds of construction photos. Yet this anonymous internet source (like all of your sources) upon which you seem to rely is contradicting one of the core (pardon the pun) premises of your imaginary core.

In any event, the truth is that there was not and never has been a concrete core in the WTC towers. The sooner you realize that, the sooner you can get on with your life and seek the help that you need.

I've answered these questions several times now. read the thread and enjoy how much garbge the opposition posts, as they have no evidence for steel core columns.

 

[Christophera]

can you find one person who does remember the "correct" process? or are you the only person in the world who knows the "truth?"

I've explained this several times now. Many people know the process but do not know that FEMA states there were steel core columns. If the 9-11 truth movement wasn't so ifiltrated it could get over its confusion and make statements that were informative rather than hashing the the same useless info back and forth.

 

[hellaeon]

hahaha your a good laugh christophera

 

[Oliver]

Oops, ignore this.

Bohohohoo, i really would if the thread wouldn´t jump up and down in front of my nose all the time...

 

[Oliver]

I've explained this several times now. Many people know the process but do not know that FEMA states there were steel core columns. If the 9-11 truth movement wasn't so ifiltrated it could get over its confusion and make statements that were informative rather than hashing the the same useless info back and forth.

So what are you gonna do now since you
give a fart about other points of view?

In your world it was a concrete core - for
what matter are you trying to ride this dead
horse to the moon and back nevertheless?

Do something - go and show your evidence
to someone who cares about it. What the
hell is your goal with this thread?

Is this a conspiracy staged by the evil admins?

​

​

 

[Belz...]

The letter I have quoted is more useful than the entire WTC report because it is consistent with the images showing the concrete core
.

It's consistent with your interpretation, therefore you accept it. Otherwise you'd reject it. I thought there was a name for that one...

What's "raw" evidence, chris ?

I've already answered that.

Good. Because I've already explained that your pictures aren't raw.

Wrong, anybody with power over publishing can.

Not really. They can decide not to publish, but that's not censorship, per se.

Wen statements are inconsistent with raw evidence they do not qualify for usage.

Good. Your entire site is disqualified, then.

Yes, and I explained it.

"Explain" ? You tossed it aside. You kept the part you liked and dumped the rest, nutter-style.

If the 9-11 truth movement wasn't so ifiltrated

So the nutters are not just wrong, they're "infiltrated". Guess you're too nuts even for them.

 

[firecoins]

Ninjas built an invisible concrete core and ninjas filled it invisible explosives.

 

[Blue Mountain]

The letter I have quoted is more useful than the entire WTC report because it is consistent with the images showing the concrete core [link removed]

A couple of questions:
1. Which report are you referring to -- 9/11 Commission, FEMA, or NIST?
2. How is the letter useful? The writer writer was not involved at all in the design and construction of the towers!

 

[Christophera]

I
So the nutters are not just wrong, they're "infiltrated". Guess you're too nuts even for them.

Yes, infiltration. the gov and the 9-11 movement. At least you have something right.


Seeing as you have never produced one image of the steel core columns from the raw evidence of 9-11, and evidence was moved from the scene illegally the disposed of, private investigations blocked. the WTC documents taken an hidden in violation of of tederal law, and you have no problem with it, your behaviro goes beypnd nuts towards sociopathic

 

[Christophera]

A couple of questions:
1. Which report are you referring to -- 9/11 Commission, FEMA, or NIST?
2. How is the letter useful? The writer writer was not involved at all in the design and construction of the towers!

The 9-11 commission depends on NIST, NIST depends on FEMA. FEMA misrepresents the core.


whoever wrote the letter definitly knew architecture and the towers, actually better than many sites which mention the concrete core.

 

[Bell]

The 9-11 commission depends on NIST, NIST depends on FEMA. FEMA misrepresents the core.


whoever wrote the letter definitly knew architecture and the towers, actually better than many site which mention the concrete core.

What many site [sic] ? Please link to them. And that does not include your own site.

 

[azazal]

whoever wrote the letter definitly knew architecture and the towers, actually better than many sites which mention the concrete core.

So let me get this straight. This letter, which is worhtless junk at best, was "written" by some one that by some one that knows more about WTC 1 and 2's non-existent concrete cores then web sites that talk about these cores. Given that your site is the only one I've seen that says there were concrete cores, is is logical to assume this letter knows more then your site. So you have just admitted that this craptasic letter is better then your site.

Thank you for playing, "Debunk My Own Stupidity"

I didn't realize one could do a self bukkake of stupid.

 

[Christophera]

So let me get this straight. This letter, which is worhtless junk at best, was "written" by some one that by some one that knows more about WTC 1 and 2's non-existent concrete cores then web sites that talk about these cores.

You are using a cognitive distortion by labeling "worthless". Over generalizing rather than understanding

Yes, the details of the letter are greater than sites that describe a concrete core.

Given that your site is the only one I've seen that says there were concrete cores, is is logical to assume this letter knows more then your site. So you have just admitted that this craptasic letter is better then your site.

Apparently you are capable of dynamic distortions. You are not reasonable and you have no evidence.

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

 

[Arus808]

Apparently you are capable of dynamic distortions. You are not reasonable and you have no evidence.

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

what part of "your site isn't credible" do you not understand.

 

[Christophera]

What many site [sic] ? Please link to them. And that does not include your own site.

The sites that describe the concrete core are linked from my page at the bottom.

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

Check the paper by August Domel PH.d. SE. PE. You will see he matter of factly identifies a concrete core without much detail, as if everyone knew.

This is why I said the letter has more detail and facts than most sites.

 

[Christophera]

what part of "your site isn't credible" do you not understand.

My site relies on raw evidence. Credibility begins there.

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