• 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.
Christophera said:
How could I possible interpret the images of this web site so consistently if I did not have the real information.
Click to expand...
1) You say there's a 1990 documentary that was aired on television, but no one has ever heard of it besides you, and no records of it exist.

2) You claim the documentary shows how the Twin Towers contained built-in explosives, but no one else in the world remembers this, particularly not the people who built or worked in the towers.

3) You then deny that the documentary says that the towers had explosives in them.

4) I show you that you did make that claim.

You can't even keep your claims straight about a nonexistent documentary, on which your whole concrete hypothesis is built.

Which is it, Chris? Are you lying or delusional? Your scheme has failed. You have made contradictory claims. You claim very specific memories of this documentary, then deny that you made those claims.

Please explain why you have done this.
 
Christophera said:
vertical bar was exposed for months due to bad weather

not the part about the RDX.

You are being selective with my words.
Click to expand...
This one is very easy. You are lying, as I've already demonstrated. You even quote the documentary:

The RDX on the vertical bar was exposed for months due to bad weather, the documentary actually had this information, and the concrete was poured before the "special plastic anti corrosion/vibration coating" was tested. After testing it was determined that it was no longer viable as a protectant. Removal of the concrete was considered but the cost and delay was too much so constrcution continued.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php...postcount=3039
Click to expand...
It's very silly for an adult to lie so blatantly. Please accept responsiblilty for your actions. It's not our fault that you make things up. Help is available for your problems if you should desire it.
 
Last edited:
Gravy said:
1) You say there's a 1990 documentary that was aired on television, but no one has ever heard of it besides you, and no records of it exist.

2) You claim the documentary shows how the Twin Towers contained built-in explosives, but no one else in the world remembers this, particularly not the people who built or worked in the towers.

3) You then deny that the documentary says that the towers had explosives in them.

4) I show you that you did make that claim.

You can't even keep your claims straight about a nonexistent documentary, on which your whole concrete hypothesis is built.

Which is it, Chris? Are you lying or delusional? Your scheme has failed. You have made contradictory claims. You claim very specific memories of this documentary, then deny that you made those claims.

Please explain why you have done this.
Click to expand...

hi gravy

you work the reality end and I'll take on the delusional ones.

Thanks for all the work but we phycos sometimes have to step up to the plate.
 
Gravy said:
This one is very easy. You are lying, as I've already demonstrated. You even quote the documentary:

It's very silly for an adult to lie so blatantly. Please accept responsiblilty for your actions. It's not our fault that you make things up. Help is available for your problems if you should desire it.
Click to expand...

Get real. You have no evidence and are desparate to malign my work and efforts. A despicable task.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html
 
Christophera said:
The story you support make no sense at all. I make sense of it.

The fact the wrong tower fell first is evidence. The fact the tops of the towers fell the wrong directions is raw evidence. Common knowledge.

All very carefully explained here.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html#anchor1207667
Click to expand...

You couldn't make sense of anything if it jumped up and bit you in your @ss.

Please provide evidence the wrong tower fell first. Evidence like a written statement that says the north tower had to fall first. Or a video convession should do.

Please provide evidence the towers fell the wrong way. Evidence like a written statement that says the towers had to fall the other way. Or a video convession should do.

Not your assumptions, conclussions or dillusions. REAL evidence. If you cannot provide real evidence, evidence that is indisputable, you are lying. Put up or shut up.
 
Gravy said:
This one is very easy. You are lying, as I've already demonstrated. You even quote the documentary:

It's very silly for an adult to lie so blatantly. Please accept responsiblilty for your actions. It's not our fault that you make things up. Help is available for your problems if you should desire it.
Click to expand...

i think chris needs to recharge the batteries in his photographic mem-cam.
to be fair though i think he only IMPLIES the use of explosives on the rebar on his alpoxy site. where he has slipped up is in embellishing the lies on this thread here. not that it makes much difference he's been found out more times than a columbo script

BV
 
Last edited:
Christophera said:
I have corrected my post to say WTC 1 was more damaged by WTC 2.
Click to expand...

So the fact that WTC2 was hit lower, at greater speed doesn't get factored in ?

Okay, I answer that now

Yes it is speculation but it does provide some reasoning for the fact that the towers fell approximately at the impact floors.
Click to expand...

You mean, as expected if they collapsed DUE to the impacts and subsequent fires ?

Realize the tops of both towers fell in the wrong directions as well.
Click to expand...

Not unless you have a very simplistic (or is it simplistice ?) perception of reality. Complex events aren't always easy to analyse, chris.

Further speculation is that the the pilot of flight 11 saw the north face of the north tower as a more spiritually significant target and so abandoned his orders.
Click to expand...

Spiritually significant ? He came from that angle, he couldn't have hit any other face without considerable delay.

Note the severe downward turn of flight 175. The pilot was willfully seeking a specific elevation for some reason.
Click to expand...

Speculation. I can't see a "severe" downward turn; and even if that were the case he simply might have decided to pick a lower target, thinking that the greater weight of the section above the damage would do the trick. Who knows ? I'm no telepath.

Both tower tops fell in the wrong directions and the wrong tower fell first.
Click to expand...

Even IF you were correct, it would only make the conspirators completely inept. There goes THAT global domination scam.

Dust can be many colors. Your point is empty.[/QUOTE]

No it isn't. You admitted that it was dust. You admit, now, that dust can be "many colors", presumably including gray. This refutes your assertion that what we see in your picture can ONLY be concrete, because your only "evidence" for that is the colour of the "structure", namely gray.

Are you retracting your statement, or not ?
 
Christophera said:
The pilot of flight 11 decided to disobey orders and hit WTC 1 on the north side rather than 2 on the west.
Click to expand...

Speculation.

For your information, the image you posted shows the core area on the left side and does not look into the core. The camera looks past it. The concrete was up to 40 feet below the top floor average.
Click to expand...

Illogical. The core HAD to support those floors above itself as well.

The fact the wrong tower fell first is evidence.
Click to expand...

How do you know it wasn't MEANT to happen this way ?

The fact the tops of the towers fell the wrong directions is raw evidence.
Click to expand...

I thought "raw evidence" were pictures ?

I've encounterd at least 3 people that saw the video or clips from it that know of the core.
Click to expand...

Did you record your conversations with them or have any proof that they exist ?

I have deduced this fact along with many thousands of others that know what explosions look like by simply viewing the many images that appear as the below does..
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, too many people think of themselves as experts in video or image interpretation. "Look like" is not good enough.

The ability to use logic does not make one a part of anything except the human race.
Click to expand...

What does that make you ?
 
Christophera said:
If you had proven that the structure you claim existed did exist, your request might be valid. You have not proven this with qualified information. Meaning raw evidence of images showing the the core area with steel columns at an elevation above the ground.

As it is, what you are doing is evasion.
Click to expand...

Evasion is you requiring "raw evidence of images showing the the core area with steel columns at an elevation above the ground" for steel core, yet you cannot produce such evidence for the North tower.
 
Christophera said:
Because no one has provided a competent explanation of what this image shows if it does not show rebar, and the image also does not show the supposed steel core columns, I have provided adequate evidence as the towers were twins and here is the south.

Click to expand...

Your first linked image does not show a concrete core.

You are unable to produce a raw image of the North tower showing the concrete core at elevation from the demo images. Provide such an image or retract your claim.
 
"The abstract painting was an explosion of colour."

"The creature in Alien seems to explode from the chest of the character."

Notice how the first sentence is a metaphor. Notice how the second sentence is a simile. Notice how neither of them are literally 'explosions'.

Notice how 90% of the 'evidence' for explosives put forward is based on people's use of hyperbolic simile and metaphor, mostly in the midst of a chaotic, noisy and terrible tragedy...
 
Mobyseven said:
"The abstract painting was an explosion of colour."

"The creature in Alien seems to explode from the chest of the character."

Notice how the first sentence is a metaphor. Notice how the second sentence is a simile. Notice how neither of them are literally 'explosions'.

Notice how 90% of the 'evidence' for explosives put forward is based on people's use of hyperbolic simile and metaphor, mostly in the midst of a chaotic, noisy and terrible tragedy...
Click to expand...

What you say is perfectly true. What sounds or is described as an explosion is not necessary caused by explosives. This has been pointed out numerous times to the cters but falls on deaf ears.

Example.

http://www.okgeosurvey1.gov/atoka.html

The earthquake was felt widely in Bryan County and Atoka County. It was also felt in Coleman, Johnston County. It usually sounded like an explosion or sonic boom, sometimes accompined or followed by a slight shaking and rattling of dishes and/or windows. Flower pots were knocked off a shelf (or porch railing nine miles South of Bently. Much information was reported by Amber in the Brian Co., Sheriff's office, and Pam Ridgeway in the Atoka Co. Sheriff's office. Pam had some callers who were concerned that the loud boom might have been a terrorist explosion.
Click to expand...
First floor watching tv sounded like some one ran into my home sounded like [an explosion] house shook just a tremble did not know what it was.
Click to expand...
First floor Sitting down, watching TV. We heard a rumble,and then what sounded like an explosion, then a little more rumble.
Click to expand...
First floor. Sitting down and watching TV Sounded like an explosion.House shook throughout
Click to expand...
.
second story watching the TV sounded like a distant rumble and I heard something exploded
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Garb said:
You failed to comment on my other picture that shows the entire core. No concrete.
Click to expand...

In the deletrious contributed by willfully ignorant deniers was my comment regarding the the aerial photo showing the top floor of the tower and ELEVATOR GUIDE RAIL SUPPORTS in the core area, not core columns, whch has been obscured by the trash.

The concrete is usually 40 feet lower.

http://algoxy.com/conc/core.html
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom