Look at this collapse

[Docker]

Docker, what do you mean by 'totally destroyed' and have you calculated how much explosives would be needed to do so?

Well your claiming gravity alone did it, so you wouldn't need that much. Just enough to break the core apart. The core that is repeatedly lied about.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Well your claiming gravity alone did it, so you wouldn't need that much. Just enough to break the core apart. The core that is repeatedly lied about.

if gravity could do it why were explosives needed?

**sharpens up ockhams razor**

 

[gumboot]

Well your claiming gravity alone did it, so you wouldn't need that much. Just enough to break the core apart. The core that is repeatedly lied about.

Chris!

-Gumboot

 

[Pardalis]

if gravity could do it why were explosives needed?

Head lock!

 

[realitybites]

Well your claiming gravity alone did it, so you wouldn't need that much. Just enough to break the core apart. The core that is repeatedly lied about.

So if you break the core, it collapses from the top down?

 

[Docker]

if gravity could do it why were explosives needed?

**sharpens up ockhams razor**

You said gravity did it I didn't. If you think so much explosives are needed then how did gravity do it?

 

[kookbreaker]

Well your claiming gravity alone did it,

Not at all. We are saying that the fire and impact led to gravity doing the damage.

so you wouldn't need that much.

How much?

Just enough to break the core apart.

And how was this placed? How was it detonated? Please show some real work here.

The core that is repeatedly lied about.

Examples?

 

[Docker]

So if you break the core, it collapses from the top down?

We know it was the core that failed because the antenna dropped first.

 

[Pardalis]

You said gravity did it I didn't. If you think so much explosives are needed then how did gravity do it?

 

[Pardalis]

We know it was the core that failed because the antenna dropped first.

And what about the other tower?

 

[kookbreaker]

You said gravity did it I didn't. If you think so much explosives are needed then how did gravity do it?

8,000 megajoules of potential energy in the block above the fire. Add to that the PE of the rest of the tower as it fell.

 

[LashL]

Well your claiming gravity alone did it, so you wouldn't need that much. Just enough to break the core apart. The core that is repeatedly lied about.

Who is claiming that gravity alone did it? Did you forget about the large jetliners, the massive structural damage, the loss of fireproofing, and the massive fires?

And, to what are you referring when you claim that the core "is repeatedly lied about"?

 

[Docker]

Not at all. We are saying that the fire and impact led to gravity doing the damage.



How much?



And how was this placed? How was it detonated? Please show some real work here.



Examples?

Brad reagan from PM lies about the core here: http://archive-b02m01.libsyn.com/po...9/452fafd9/mickelson/mickelson-2006-08-22.mp3

 

[kookbreaker]

Brad reagan from PM lies about the core here: http://archive-b02m01.libsyn.com/po...9/452fafd9/mickelson/mickelson-2006-08-22.mp3

Please point out the lie.

 

[Docker]

Please point out the lie.

He actually says about 20 minutes in that there were no columns in the core of the towers.

 

[realitybites]

We know it was the core that failed because the antenna dropped first.

And the south tower tilting? Was that due to core damage as well?

 

[gumboot]

We know it was the core that failed because the antenna dropped first.

It didn't, but never mind. We know for a fact the core didn't fail first, because in video of the collapses most of the core remains standing for as much as 20-30 seconds after the rest of the building has collapsed.

-Gumboot

 

[defaultdotxbe]

You said gravity did it I didn't. If you think so much explosives are needed then how did gravity do it?

do you (you as in docker) thing GPE contained enough energy to collapse the towers in the manner observed?

if so, why do you believe explosives were needed?

if not, how much energy would be needed?

 

[kookbreaker]

He actually says about 20 minutes in that there were no columns in the core of the towers.

I may be listening to the wrong part (as QT on the browser does not have a timer), but he states that there was a shell of outer columns, then he mentions a 'big structural base' in the middle. Then he states that there is just the floors in between. He then states "THere wasn't like a series of columns in between" (unlike the ESB). He is talking about the space between the structural base and the outer columns. He then mentions that the plane went through the outer columns and did not stop until it hit the core (prior to this he states that the WTC towers did not have a 'thick, concrete core' like the EBS, which is accurate).

At no point does he deny the columns in the core. He simplifies by calling it a 'big structural base'. But there is no statement that there were no columns there.

I don't think he is the one lying here.

 

[Docker]

I may be listening to the wrong part (as QT on the browser does not have a timer), but he states that there was a shell of outer columns, then he mentions a 'big structural base' in the middle. Then he states that there is just the floors in between. He then states "THere wasn't like a series of columns in between" (unlike the ESB). He is talking about the space between the structural base and the outer columns. He then mentions that the plane went through the outer columns and did not stop until it hit the core (prior to this he states that the WTC towers did not have a 'thick, concrete core' like the EBS, which is accurate).

At no point does he deny the columns in the core. He simplifies by calling it a 'big structural base'. But there is no statement that there were no columns there.

I don't think he is the one lying here.

Wait till the caller comes on and asks him at the end.