• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Chris, your evidence consists completely of one photo. That is all. Really. The rest is pure fantasy.

And your photo shows absolutely nothing conclusive. Certainly not enough to counter the perponderance of evidence that there was a steel core.
 
Christophera said:
But only because the deniers will not use evidence that exists and cannot produce evidence for the steel core columns they so badly support as existing.
Click to expand...
Hmm... assuming there were steel core columns, what would be acceptable evidence for their existence?
 
mortimer said:
Chris, your evidence consists completely of one photo. That is all. Really. The rest is pure fantasy.

And your photo shows absolutely nothing conclusive. Certainly not enough to counter the perponderance of evidence that there was a steel core.
Click to expand...

I notice you post no evidence of the steel core.

So it is a real challenge to you to say there are 18 images at this site that anybody can see.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html

And at the bottom of this page are sties with reference that concur with the raw evidence of photos.

http://algoxy.com/conc/core.html
 
Christophera said:
Maxim:
If a suppossed explantion does not explain the event, it is not the truth. No explanation that does not explain the event can be the truth.
Click to expand...

If we suppose that god exist and there is a reason
for everything that happens on this planet, isn´t it
also supposed that we should accept god´s plans
instead criticizing him for the rest of our lifes? :confused:
 
Christophera said:
Of course but an explanation is needed. So to cast doubt onto one, another must be provided that has a better basis in evidence.
Click to expand...

Why is an explanation needed that fit´s into your mind?
Did you forget? You already have an explanation for what
happened: C4, Conrete Core, controlled demolition, inside Job.

What else on god´s green earth do you want to know?

You´re 57, right? Maybe time to grow up?
 
Chris, how sure are you that you are right? 100%? 99.9%? 95%? Is there any doubt in your mind?
 
Christophera said:
Hey, you don't have any evidence either nor have you provided a reasonable explanation of what this is if it is not concrete.
Click to expand...

I told you HERE. Use your EYES.

Doh, ......... you forgot to explain how tempered steel columns that were 100% welded got cut like this
Click to expand...

They were cut by people for TRANSPORT.

Masonry often referres technically to stonework particuarly in the uk.
Click to expand...

I knew you'd say that. But it's nonsensical. NO supertall building has EVER been built with sonework. Why the HELL would the article make that distinction ?

If that is not true then you are asserting that the image of the WTC 2 core shows drywall that has survived hundreds of thousands of tons of steel crashing over it.

And that is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Is it ? People survived in that stairwell. Why not drywall ?
 
We all are wrong:

http://lofi.forum.physorg.com/Basic-Physics_3108-9400.html

physorg.com said:
Leslie E. Robertson
1st April 2006 - 06:33 PM
Christophera is correct in stating that the Twin Towers were constructed with a concrete core. Although in my original design the core was to be a steel framed one that decision was overridden by Minoru Yamasaki the architect.

That core should have resisted the airplane impacts AND the fires. I have said nothing for four and a half years but can remain silent no longer. My belief is that only explosives could have caused WTC 1 & WTC 2 to collapse the way they did on September 11, 2001.

Leslie E. Robertson
Director Leslie E. Robertson Associates, R.L.L.P. and lead engineer of the World Trade Cente
Click to expand...
 
Christophera said:
Hey, you don't have any evidence either nor have you provided a reasonable explanation of what this is if it is not concrete.
Click to expand...

With all the evidence been presented, it is probably the steel columns surrounded by the drywall of the elevator shafts, stairwells, and elevator lobbies. All of which is being onscured by tons of falling debris and smoke.

Beyond that you can't tell from a photograph.
 
Christophera said:
Masonry often referres technically to stonework particuarly in the uk.
Click to expand...
Only the WTC and the contractors were not in the U.K.

If that is not true then you are asserting that the image of the WTC 2 core shows drywall that has survived hundreds of thousands of tons of steel crashing over it.


And that is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Yep, rediculous. Drywall could not have possibly survived.

http://army.firststrike.net/nyd/damage/pages/911-damage_393.htm
http://army.firststrike.net/nyd/damage/pages/911-damage_026.htm
Oops! Sorry Chris, Wrong as usual.
 

Attachments

  • 5435b.jpg
    5435b.jpg
    141.2 KB · Views: 6
Christophera said:
You are finished with pretending to be logical or reasonably showing why justice should not be provided on 3,000 capitol crimes in order to retain our rights and freedoms.

I have added url's to you post that relate to helping you to deal with your mental problem and remembering what happened.

You explain nothing. You have no evidence and have posted none. I explain near free fall and total pulverization.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html
Click to expand...

Bolding mine.

And that's coming from you, Alfred? First get your own brain to the garage, before accusing others of mental problems.
 
uruk said:
Only the WTC and the contractors were not in the U.K.



Yep, rediculous. Drywall could not have possibly survived.

http://army.firststrike.net/nyd/damage/pages/911-damage_393.htm
http://army.firststrike.net/nyd/damage/pages/911-damage_026.htm
Oops! Sorry Chris, Wrong as usual.
Click to expand...

Your effort to misrepresent the image is not equalled by your failure to explain why no core columns are vivsble in the fore ground or in this image of the WTC 2 core in the core area where they must be seen if they existed.

Your image shows what appears as the hallway openings and their individual floors. The torn drywall covers the concrete wall in you image and it has all been removed in this one.
 
Bell said:
Bolding mine.

And that's coming from you, Alfred? First get your own brain to the garage, before accusing others of mental problems.
Click to expand...

I'm a pioneer in exposing the fraud in the mental health care industry and show that the courts enable the problem by allowing failure to appear on subpoena, and the county counsel interfereing with the appearance of a witness..

It is clear that you support unlawful government as you work to conceal the deprivation of duw process in 3000 murders so the willfull neglect of the supposed authorities of mental health are easy to ignore..

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3934&stc=1&d=1162572227
 

Attachments

  • aparesponse.jpg
    aparesponse.jpg
    30.8 KB · Views: 12
Smiffy said:
Shsssh... Dont tell Chris, but I have come across the REAL answer! It was a mini-nuke!

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/finn/5/soldier5.htm
Click to expand...

Oh Smiffy, you've fallen for the full ploy.

First they obscure the possible then support the impossible so that those desperately seeking a feasible explanation can desperately cling to absurd, poorly understood propositions.

A nuke cannot be delayed and the firefighters here describe high speed delays in the floor by floor detonations.

http://algoxy.com/psych/images/discussion_in_firehouse.mpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom