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

Status
Not open for further replies.
thank you chris...........

........i have spent quite a few enjoyable hours on this thread learning how to debunk a plainly absurd theory such as the one that you defend so pathetically here.
i think this thread should be recorded somewhere as a resource for rookie skeptik students such as me when starting out on the road to debunkothology. i must say though, i found it suprisingly easy to help pull apart the seams of the fallacy you try to weave, in fact TOO easy. i now relish the opportunity to have a go at, dare i say it, more plausible CT's such as the no planers, aliens from jupiter did it, or osama is bushs' bitch brigade.....
thanks again

toodle pip

BV
 
Last edited:
TheFeds said:
You do recall that one core was oriented 90° to the other, don't you? If you want to use those pictures, you need to find a similar photograph taken from a position 90° to one side. You have provided a view east (into the rising sun) and west (toward the Hudson River). You need one looking north or south. This isn't rocket science; to compare photographs of the core structures, you need pictures of the wide faces of each one, and pictures of the narrow faces of each one. Without both views, your evidence is insufficient.
Click to expand...

The important factor is that one tower has 2 hallways and the other has one..

TheFeds said:
But it gets better. In your sunrise photograph, do you realize that the hallways in the core area are depicted as being stacked one on top of the other, rather than staggered on alternate floors (like in your drawing). How can you possibly claim that your drawing is correct, when your own photo obviously contradicts it? Your drawing has been proven incorrect; you must retract it.
Click to expand...

The light bleeds over the staggered floor without the hallway. If you enlarge that sunrise image you will find a wide gray band between the reflected light from the vertically adjacent halls.

TheFeds said:
Additionally, you claimed that the report was a "fraudulent source". What is your proof that NIST is a fraudulent organization? Without proof, your statement appears libellous; are you so desperate that you must resort to defamation? We require proof of this alleged fraud.
Click to expand...

The image of the proof.top of the tower undergoing a high speed series of detonations is proof NIST is a fraudulent study.

TheFeds said:
On the contrary. You made the claim, therefore you must support it. You need to prove (with calculations, if necessary) why it is good enough. The burden of proof rests with you.
Click to expand...

It is not true that you assert that there were 47 1,300 foot columns inthe core area of the towers. I accept raw evidence only and you have produced none whatsoever to prove your assertions. No calculations needed or accepted. An image of the steel core columns in the core area protruding as the building comes down will suffice..

TheFeds said:
And furthermore, the notion that the image "would show core columns silhouetted" is foolish. Recall your own posted images that required illumination through the building (e.g. direct sunlight) to see the hallways. You tell us that in a cloud of dense grey dust and smoke, we ought to be able to see clear through to the other side? No detail within the building is visible in that photograph, because the lighting is insufficient, and the smoke and dust obscure the building.
Click to expand...

It is not lighting or perception of detail on the face it is the shape and lack of strcutural steel protruding. Your paragraph is foolis and the link I added to your own words proves it.

TheFeds said:
I did not say that the "spire" was supposed to be invisible. Recall that here I asked you to edit a copy of that image, and to make a dimension mark across the 4' rebar centers. Why didn't you do so? And here, I explained to you the meaning of resolution with regard to your images and your rebar. With calculations, explain why you believe my math to be in error.
Click to expand...

You want it both ways now.

You say a pixel is 3 feet wide, How can that be when a 2 foot wide column is visible and the obvious fine vertical elements which I know to be a hundred or so high tensile steel rebars 3 inches in diameter is also visisble? The rebar is so small it does disappear on the right side. The images prove you wrong and you have never, nor has anyone, provided an explanation for the many fine vertical elements.
 
Garb said:
Well I must ask how they could not be involved. It's common knowledge that the Mohawks are the core of the truth movement.
Click to expand...

Not correct enough.

The Indigenous people of this continent are the core of the truth movement in this hemisphere.
 
uruk said:
It's easy to make up fantasy to fit abunch of pictures. Especially when you alter a diagram to fit your fantasy text.
Click to expand...

If it was easy to make a fantasy fit a bunch of pictures then you would have images of steel core columns at elevations above the ground, but, ......... you don't even have that.

I prove there are no steel core columns with one picture and a person with some experience with heavy steel and concrete demolition would easily identify a concrete core.
 
Christophera said:
If it was easy to make a fantasy fit a bunch of pictures then you would have images of steel core columns at elevations above the ground, but, ......... you don't even have that.

I prove there are no steel core columns with one picture and a person with some experience with heavy steel and concrete demolition would easily identify a concrete core.
Click to expand...

If it was a controlled demolition, wouldn't the cores be destroyed?
 
Christophera said:
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
Click to expand...


Belz... said:
What I have a problem with is all the typos in your post.
Click to expand...

Gosh Belz,

I am so sorry. I really should pay more attention to the spelling in my posts. I'm so ashamed. How can I apologize?


No, .......... sorry. It is a concrete core.
 
Christophera said:
Thes professional public safety personel did.
Click to expand...

1. Nice wording for "professional public saftey personel. They are called firefighters if you didn't know.
2. When a building is demolished, explosives go up, not down.
3. Did it ever occur to you that they were describing the building collapsing? Last time I checked when floors smash into other floors they aren't silent.
4. Doesn't this contradict your "no explosions because they were in concrete" idea?

And way to not even discuss how dust proves there is an explosion.
 
Christophera said:
If NIST could explain the image below credibly, what you say might have veracity.
Click to expand...

NIST assembled 200 experts in 8 teams. In addition to the main 300 page report, it wrote 45 additional reports and supplementary documents. Why do you suggest that such a large team of experts in their fields came to a wrong conclusion?

Christophera said:
Instead, since 3,000 innocent Americans were killed and due process violated, evidence removed and destroyed, now your credibility as an American that loves their rights and freedoms is in question.
Click to expand...
You've made a mistaken assumption here. Care to guess what it is?

Christophera said:
NIST's attempts to explain this are a harbinger of greater loss of rights and freedoms and worse. Their explanation is ludicrous for any American who has watched TV and film wherein high explosives are seen detonating, despite the varity possible therein. The notion that this is a collapse is laughable, literally.
Get your evidence (sic) together yourself.
Click to expand...

Why the "(sic)" after "evidence"?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom