Find an image of the towers partially down that show the core colums in the core area. If you cannot find one consider there was a concrete core
Impossible. Even if you were right and the columns were not for support, we still wouldn't see concrete, and we still'd have to explain how the top floors of the WTC stood during construction if the CONCRETE HADN'T BEEN POURED THERE.
I witnessed the construction of the concrete core by watching a 2 hour documentary that aired on channel 10, KCET in southern California in 1990.
And pray tell, why did the evil conspirators allow this documentary to be made ? Mohawks, again ?
I've admitted I do not know which tower this image is from. It doesn't matter.
It doesn't matter that you can't be bothered to check such a simple fact ?
The below image is your image which you have no explanation for. I have shown with annotations and lines to fit it in with another image of WTC 2 from the east and show it is WTC 2.
Chris, in order to prove your hypothesis about light reflexion on the concrete, you might want to provide pictures of ANOTHER example besides WTC. That's work.
Read the survivors accounts and you will see that each tower had special training for the fire marshalls for each floor. The towers cores were so different that specific training for evacuations was required for the the different towers.
Still doesn't say anything about concrete.
You are a child when it comes to knowledge of the mind.
Oh, please enlighten us.
The APA was fonded by a skull and bones member. Hearsay, but I believe it after my continues experiences.
Yes, a friend of mine believes in homeopathy from hearsay, too.
In the punctuation of the below letter, it is implied that the director of the "Ethics Department" left because of my letter and evidence to the APA.
Actually, the only causal link is between the lack of director and you not getting an answer.
You might be able to read, but you are not going to learn anything without reading beteen the lines.
In casual conversation the punctuation would mean that the director of the ethics department left because of what I had written and evidenced.
But this ISN'T a casual conversation, but a letter. There is no "between the lines" here.
My point, which you have conpletely ignored, which my notes underline, is that WHEN the concrete core IS REFERRED to, it is done so consistently.
This contradicts that statement:
NOTE: This page has some confusion mentioning multiple, concrete clad cores.
Are they consistent or not ?