Blue Mountain
Resident Skeptical Hobbit
How many Mohawks have you interviewed on this subject?
And I'm referrring to the ones who actually worked on the project, not the one who worked on the towers before construction began
.
Has Anyone Seen A Realistice Explanation For Free Fall Of The Towers?
- Thread starter Christophera
- Start date
- Status
And I'm referrring to the ones who actually worked on the project, not the one who worked on the towers before construction began
.Blue Mountain
Resident Skeptical Hobbit
Hmmm. If the Mohawks working on the towers (mostly steelworkers, IIRC) quietly went about interrupting the control circuits in the concrete (which they likely would not have had any need to concern themselves with), how is it that 30 years later the circuits were suddenly active again?
Whenever I'm tired, whenever I'm down, I know a place to have a good laugh. Here. Reading Chris' amazing, astounding, and invariably incredible (in the proper sense) claims.
Thanks, Chris.
You know I'm kinda wondering if he's doing this as some sort of performance art type thing?
Thanks, Chris.
You know I'm kinda wondering if he's doing this as some sort of performance art type thing?
Which tower has which? Please re-post the images in question, with all of the hallways highlighted.
How do you know this? I have created an enlargement as you requested (see below). There are no such grey bands. If you see grey bands, highlight them, and re-post the image.
You'll surely notice the pixellated appearance. Those are the individual pixels from your source image. They cannot be sharpened without losing detail, because sharpening destroys existing image information, and replaces it with more differentiated zones of colour. When you post an image, do not sharpen it.
It is no such thing. Proof of fraud requires motive, means and opportunity to commit the crime (in this case, falsifying a report with fraudulent intent). Your image does not show motive. Your image does not show means. Your image does not show opportunity. Therefore your image is not proof of fraud.
Your image depicts the destruction of the WTC. A single image is not proof of a "high speed of series" of anything. Absent evidence like plumes of flame, you must realize that without knowledge of what debris is being expelled (average and distribution of mass, coefficients of drag, etc.), and knowledge of the explosion (speed, magnitude, etc.) you cannot accurately predict whether the cloud of dust and smoke is the result of an explosion and collapse, or just of a collapse.
I do not assert that they were continuous. I did not state the quantity (though I have referenced sources which might depict 47). They were constructed by connecting the ends of much shorter column segments together, either by welding, riveting or bolting. This is visible in numerous photos and videos, including the 1983 Port Authority piece. Why would they necessarily protrude if they were attached to a collapsing building?
Furthermore, you are obviously ignorant of the methods practiced by structural engineers. Calculations are needed and accepted. When investigating the collapses, do you believe that all the engineering professionals did was to sift through a series of photographs? No, not a chance. It is expected that a structural engineer create and certify his calculations, when he performs an analysis. If you want to tackle problems of a structural engineering nature, you must also perform calculations. Failing that, all you have is idle speculation.
It is no such thing. I pointed out that it was impossible to see through the dust cloud. If you can see through the dust cloud, highlight and re-post the details inside the dust cloud. Identify and label them. But you can't do that, can you?
You cannot see any interior details in the above picture. That's just the way it is. No amount or lack of structural steel protruding will change that fact. You need a higher-resolution image.
If a pixel is 3' wide, what fraction of it is occupied by a 2' column? Did you get 2/3? If so, you should expect that 1/3 of the pixel will be a representation of the background. But because a pixel is the finest unit of detail, its colour is the weighted average of its constituents. 2/3 dark-coloured steel + 1/3 light-coloured background = 1 pixel that is still probably closer to the appearance of dark steel, than it is to light background. But it is not an image of either, and without knowing beforehand that it was steel and background, you cannot know what was originally contained within this pixel. Let that sink in. If an object is smaller than the pixel size, you are not permitted to say that it is visible, because, by definition, the image does not contain a pixel which belongs uniquely to that object. Something was there to cause the picture to have a characteristic colour. But it is totally impossible (not figuratively, but rather literally impossible) to know from a digital image what real-life objects contributed to the pixel, by looking only at that pixel for detail. And what's more, one pixel shows remarkably little detail—you need several pixels to show texture. If you don't have an object several pixels wide, you cannot claim to know anything about the texture.
You are wrong if you claim to recognize hundreds of 3" steel rebars in that picture. You can perhaps see something that appears to have the same average colour as hundreds of 3" rebars would (in that the pixel that it occupies is coloured the same way), but you cannot see individual rebars. It is impossible. You must understand that there is a distinction between seeing rebar, and seeing a pixel that is equally grey.
If you still claim that I'm wrong, you must draw a 3" (to scale) dimension line on that picture, indicating the width of a rebar seen from the camera's viewing distance. If you can draw such a line, and it is approximately 1/12 of a pixel in width (1/12 of 3' is 3"), then you will have proven me wrong. (Remember, you may not scale the picture, unless you preserve the original pixellation.)
Last edited:
Raw evidence that they are the "core of the truth movement", please.
What are you going to do, photoshop a picture of a Mohawk pointing at the WTC debris, and call it proof?
Christophera ... these cores you propose would be approx 25m x 40m x 400m in volume, = 400,000 cubic metres.
Allowing 25% for stairways, lift shafts etc that's 300,000 cubic metres of concrete.
At 2.4 tonnes per cubic metre that makes 720,000 tonnes of concrete per tower, i.e. approx 1.5 million tonnes of demolished concrete in total for two buildings.
Given that it was held together (according to your theory) by 6" rebar, what happened to 1.5 million tonnes of reinforced concrete at Ground Zero? It simply isn't there in the photos. That much concrete would make a pile about 100m high, even without all the steel.
You cannot see any interior details in the above picture. That's just the way it is. No amount or lack of structural steel protruding will change that fact. You need a higher-resolution image.
below is an image of the scene captured at around the same time from a slightly different angle. you may see (from the higher resolution detail arrowed) that there is NO EVIDENCE of 3" rebar or indeed any of christopheras mythical concrete core. this evidence has been put before christophera previously. he chose to ignore it. he exercises his "get-out" clause on any evidence that counters his tired absurdly idiotic theories.
one has to ask also, if this is 3" rebar as he asserts, why wasn't it destoyed by the C4 coating? more mohawk skull-duggery? those pesky indiginents huh? wait till rumsfeld and connie get holda that one...........
BV
Christophera
Banned
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 2,760
I have my ways but that would be allowing you to change the subject. Truthfully. I would be surprised if your heart and mind could go there. You apply some juvinile labeling sytem to it like "woo" and pretend to be on with your life.
OK Chris, just to step back for a minute from the details of the construction of the WTC, I'd like to talk about your underlying premise for all this.
The Mohawk angle is new to me, so let's see if I've understood what you are trying to tell us here: The world is locked in a struggle of Good V Evil and you alone understand the reality of this eternal war.
From what you have said previously I am led to understand that a secret cabal of mystical hypnotist priest types have been manipulating world events since prehistoric times. They were the ones responsible for Stonehenge and also had some influence in the Roman Empire, ancient Egypt and no doubt assisted the Chinese in building the Great Wall.
Meanwhile in the Americas the native people were part of a different secret mystical tradition in opposition to the Evil European secret mystics.
Some time in the late 15th century these two opposed forces met and after a few centuries of internecine warfare this conflict reached a flashpoint on September eleven two thousand and one.
Somehow the existence of a concrete core in the WTC towers is indicative of all of this back and forth mystical hypnotism and if all of us who don't believe you would just recognise the reality of what you say the world might be saved.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest to you that even if there was a concrete core in the towers, the struggle between Good and Evil will not be resolved on the JREF conspiracy theory sub-forum.
I would suggest to you that the only real way to counter Evil in the world is by doing Good. There is a limit to an individual's capacity to right the wrongs of this world, but a good place to start is in your own life. Try being nice to your neighbours. Try helping old ladies cross the street. Help the homeless, donate to charity or do some volunteer work for the Salvation Army. The only way to reduce the Evil is to add to the Good.
You will never convince people that they are being held in thrall by a global cabal of evil druidic hypnotists, but you might inspire people to good works by leading by example.
Cheers.
The Mohawk angle is new to me, so let's see if I've understood what you are trying to tell us here: The world is locked in a struggle of Good V Evil and you alone understand the reality of this eternal war.
From what you have said previously I am led to understand that a secret cabal of mystical hypnotist priest types have been manipulating world events since prehistoric times. They were the ones responsible for Stonehenge and also had some influence in the Roman Empire, ancient Egypt and no doubt assisted the Chinese in building the Great Wall.
Meanwhile in the Americas the native people were part of a different secret mystical tradition in opposition to the Evil European secret mystics.
Some time in the late 15th century these two opposed forces met and after a few centuries of internecine warfare this conflict reached a flashpoint on September eleven two thousand and one.
Somehow the existence of a concrete core in the WTC towers is indicative of all of this back and forth mystical hypnotism and if all of us who don't believe you would just recognise the reality of what you say the world might be saved.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest to you that even if there was a concrete core in the towers, the struggle between Good and Evil will not be resolved on the JREF conspiracy theory sub-forum.
I would suggest to you that the only real way to counter Evil in the world is by doing Good. There is a limit to an individual's capacity to right the wrongs of this world, but a good place to start is in your own life. Try being nice to your neighbours. Try helping old ladies cross the street. Help the homeless, donate to charity or do some volunteer work for the Salvation Army. The only way to reduce the Evil is to add to the Good.
You will never convince people that they are being held in thrall by a global cabal of evil druidic hypnotists, but you might inspire people to good works by leading by example.
Cheers.
Christophera
Banned
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 2,760
I have my ways but that would be allowing you to change the subject. Truthfully. I would be surprised if your heart and mind could go there. You apply some juvinile labeling system to it like "woo" and pretend to be on with your life.
Who said "woo"? Not me. Who applied any labelling system whatsoever? Not me. So what are you talking about? What raw evidence exists, that the Mohawks form the core of some "truth movement"?
And if you prefer to stay on topic, you should probably indicate whether or not you now understand why the use of low-resolution photographs of objects that are covered in dust and smoke is not sufficient evidence.
And then, you should probably explain why the enlarged version of your sunrise picture doesn't show the details that you claimed it did.
And after that, take some of Brainache's advice.
uruk
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2003
- Messages
- 5,311
no steel colums? What are these?
Attachments
Christophera
Banned
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 2,760
From what I know it was those that dug up the Indians skulls that were the problem.
That is the corner of the framed wall of the "MASSIVE BOX COLUMNS" which were actually called interior box columns. They were fastened to the concrete core, the concrete blew up, ............... don't cry.
Last edited:
Christophera
Banned
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 2,760
Perimeter Core Club Championship Winner!!
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3700&d=1161563839
OMG!! Perimeter core columns.
Nobody would of ever thought of that. You can join jackx from Loose Change and have the perimeter core column club. Hit your heads together, you have fun and stuff.... sheeesh for that that matter you might already be the same head as jackx.
Just so witchever head you are, is not too terribly confused, I'll show you the corrected version that reveals the location of the core wal footing as between the interior box columns and the elevator pits.
homer,
I've warned you about the brain damage from hitting your head repeatedly. Well, ........ its gotten very serious, very serious indeed.
However, there is a bright side. You are now the champion of the perimeter core club.
Congratulations homer!
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3700&d=1161563839
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3703&d=1161563888
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3704&d=1161563968
ON EDIT:
All those things you call "steel core columns" are actually elevator guide rails. Much smaller and can be seen here in the same basic proportions inside the ring of "MASSIVE BOX COLUMNS".
(This post dedicated to Oliver in the spirit of elaborate flames)
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3700&d=1161563839
OMG!! Perimeter core columns.
Nobody would of ever thought of that. You can join jackx from Loose Change and have the perimeter core column club. Hit your heads together, you have fun and stuff.... sheeesh for that that matter you might already be the same head as jackx.
Just so witchever head you are, is not too terribly confused, I'll show you the corrected version that reveals the location of the core wal footing as between the interior box columns and the elevator pits.
homer,
I've warned you about the brain damage from hitting your head repeatedly. Well, ........ its gotten very serious, very serious indeed.
However, there is a bright side. You are now the champion of the perimeter core club.
Congratulations homer!
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3700&d=1161563839
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3703&d=1161563888
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3704&d=1161563968
ON EDIT:
All those things you call "steel core columns" are actually elevator guide rails. Much smaller and can be seen here in the same basic proportions inside the ring of "MASSIVE BOX COLUMNS".
(This post dedicated to Oliver in the spirit of elaborate flames)
Last edited:
Christophera warning Uruk about braindamage. Classic! Chris, little boy, start by taking care of your own brain. See a doctor. Your brain would appreciate that.
Christophera
Banned
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 2,760
The plural use of core is just not fitting. Each tower had one core structure which was a cast reinforced concrete tube.
Cold war self destruct technology using C4 plastic coating was applied in an engineered thickness located exactly in the center and perfectly distributed in precise proportions accordingly to explosive containment value of the concrete. It detonated leaving the steel. Steel is very hard to cut with explosives. Very efficient. Grinds up everything. Falls iinstantly.
Below is a combination of two different explosive circuits. The floors went off first then the core, floors at 75 milliseconds and core at 300 ms, 4 floors then 40 feet of core all the way down.
There were aberration's that left elements standing when explosive were exposed to air and oxidization that left elements standing after asymetrical delayed demolitions.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3706&stc=1&d=1161565923
Attachments
Christophera
Banned
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 2,760
I've shown the towers had different hallway schemes and that there is a better explanation for all the evidence considered for concrete core that there is for steel which is never seen in the core.
- Status