• 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.
Oliver said:
Well, you are the wall - you are not able to accept
that it was a conrete core... ;)

BTW: (since popping into my range of vision again...)

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

Yes, it wasn´t Freefall, thank you!
Click to expand...

Well, that's the last time I check posts from someone on my ignore list.

Bye.
 
Oliver, are you actively trying to make this thread even more unpleasant? Because if so, you're doing a wonderful job.
 
Powa said:
Oliver, are you actively trying to make this thread even more unpleasant? Because if so, you're doing a wonderful job.
Click to expand...

No, i was talking with him. This is part
of a discussion. What problem is it you
have?

Chris annoys me, i annoy you, Belz annoys
both of us and the rest is annoyed, too.
(okay, the admins laugh)

This is all that this thread is about. Just
because i don´t stop posting to this thread
does not mean that someone will ever stop
this crap in here. BTW: Why are U reading it?

And the most wonderful job are the ones
to try to talk to Alfred. There is no discussion
at all since it´s going round and round and
round... and the inital question is solved.

Belz knwos this - and he gives a **it about
other peoples mood in his young, ignorant life.

You may stop posting to this thread if you
want to disturb the discussion or if it annoys
you too much.
 
Okay, back to the Free Fall issue...
@Alfred: It was no free fall. What makes
you think this way nevertheless and what
does this has to do with the concrete core?

Peace,
Oliver :)
 
That would still be a yes - official report. Try taking a few chemistry, engineering and physics course. They would prove invaluable.
 
Oliver said:
No, i was talking with him. This is part of a discussion.
Click to expand...
Of course. By all means discuss. But try not to be too annoying.

What problem is it you have?
Click to expand...
I have a problem with people who instead of contributing to the discussion at hand try to annoy someone into giving up.

Chris annoys me, i annoy you, Belz annoys both of us and the rest is annoyed, too.
Click to expand...
Chris' excuse is mental illness. What's yours?

(okay, the admins laugh)
Click to expand...
I doubt it.

This is all that this thread is about. Just because i don´t stop posting to this thread does not mean that someone will ever stop
this crap in here.
Click to expand...
If anything, we need LESS crap, not more.

BTW: Why are U reading it?
Click to expand...
Why do people watch traffic accidents? I can't stop.

And the most wonderful job are the ones to try to talk to Alfred. There is no discussion at all since it´s going round and round and round... and the inital question is solved.
Click to expand...
Cats play with dead mice. It's still fun.

Belz knwos this - and he gives a **it about other peoples mood in his young, ignorant life.
Click to expand...
If he pisses you off so much, why don't you take it to Flame Wars? I, on the other hand, find Belz... to have patience of a saint. He's tirelessly debating Chris, despite the fact that we all know it's in vain.

You may stop posting to this thread if you want to disturb the discussion or if it annoys you too much.
Click to expand...
I don't want to disturb this discussion. From time to time I even contribute. BTW, the biggest annoyance to me right now is not Chris.

Look, if you want to make fun of loons or anyone else, by all means do it. Have a laugh. But don't try to be as annoying as you can be. It gets old soon.
 
Sorry, too much text. Could you sum it up, please?
BTW: You seem to be offtopic. And the feeling you
have is a well known to me because this thread.

And no, in my humble opinion it was no conctrete
core. It does not make sense to me. Please explain
it one more time, Alfred.

Peace,
Oliver :)
 
Free Fall (not)

Christophera said:
That 2 towers would fall at near free fall speeds almost identically to the ground demands consideration of everything OUTSIDE the official story because due process was violated in dealing with capitol crimes.

The last paragraph justifies the action of NOT attempting to explain events with plane impacts and fires to justifiably determine if an explanation for the identical near free falls can be explained because it is absolutely unheard of, PERIOD.
Click to expand...

Are you still on the free-fall thing? I thought you agreed that it might not be so and/or that it wasn't all that relevant.

Here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1663001#post1663001

and Here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1663057#post1663057
 
Powa said:
If he pisses you off so much, why don't you take it to Flame Wars? I, on the other hand, find Belz... to have patience of a saint. He's tirelessly debating Chris, despite the fact that we all know it's in vain.
Click to expand...

Oh, I know it's in vain.

I understand why chris is arguing, here. He's utterly convinced of his ideas. Though I disagree and I suspect, with evidence, that he has some mental problem, his behaviour is expected.

Oliver, on the other hand, I don't get. When a thread ceases to interest me I move on. He seems to linger, and keeps saying things to me although he knows I'm ignoring him. For some reason, he also seems to assume I'm much, much younger than him. He's a weird bird, that man. Cute girlfriend, though.
 
So much for your integrity to reason and reading.

[URL]http://www.ncsea.com/downloads/wtcseerp.pdf[/URL]
Click to expand...
Concrete core? Sorry Chirs your core is not concrete

oops in my letter to the author he says it is in error, no concrete core!!!

Keith-

NCSEA forwarded your question to me. I was the author of the document you are questioning.
You are correct that the twin towers did not have a concrete core. However, they, did have a well-defined core consisting of conventional steel framing supported by steel columns. Generally, horizontal framing in the core was not moment-resisting framing, though semi-rigid (type PR) connections were used for some of this framing. Thus, the statement that the core structure was not designed for lateral resistance.

The core framing did play a significant role in resisting collapse, however, after the aircraft impacts and initial damage sustained by these impacts. The core, ultimately, also played a significant role in the collapse. If you would like more information, you may obtain detailed reports at www.nist.gov/wtc

Regards,
Ron Hamburger
Click to expand...


Your own proof has become; no concrete core. Your source is wrong,and he said so. Your TV documentary made a mistake, your source on the web made a mistake.
 
Jennie C. said:
Are you still on the free-fall thing? I thought you agreed that it might not be so and/or that it wasn't all that relevant.

Here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1663001#post1663001

and Here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1663057#post1663057
Click to expand...

I though you agreed that spelling was more important than the 3,000 murders. I spell capitol right. Aren't you going to comment?

And, I said "near" free fall because there is no real way to know the exact rate. Close is good enough it is all way too fast.

At least there is a logical explanation somewhere.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html
 
beachnut said:
Concrete core? Sorry Chirs your core is not concrete

oops in my letter to the author he says it is in error, no concrete core!!!

Your own proof has become; no concrete core. Your source is wrong,and he said so. Your TV documentary made a mistake, your source on the web made a mistake.
Click to expand...

Yes Oops is correct,

August Domel is the author not Ron Hamburger.

Does he or can you provide a reasonable explanation for what this is if it is not concrete.
 
Last edited:
that means he used his team, oops


This document was prepared by Dr. August Domel, Jr.

Prepared, not author of the statement, oops​
 
Christophera said:
Yes Oops is correct,

August Domel is the author not Ron Hamburger.

Does he or can you provide a reasonable explanation for what this is if it is not concrete.
Click to expand...


sorry but again you ignore real facts and jump into the fire

Domel prepared the document and used Ron's work; he explains here for those who do not read their own source or understand what and who really did it!!!!!!!

1.4 Source Material
The information presented in this document was obtained from two sources. Much of the
information was obtained from discussions with structural engineering teams that worked at
Ground Zero. The other source was the author’s own opinions based on working at Ground
Zero.
Nothing in this document should be interpreted as a criticism of any of the structural engineers or
structural engineering organizations involved with any aspect of the emergency response. Any
questions regarding this issue should be resolved by referring to Chapter 11 of this document.​


Ron was on the team!!!!! he told us in the letter you ignored​

Thanks so much Chris for taking the time to ignore the work I did for you​

Thanks Chris for being so kind and taking the time to ignore my work to correct your source.​

Thank you​
 
Christophera said:
I spell capitol right.
Click to expand...
Merriam-Webster said:
Main Entry: cap·i·tol
Pronunciation: 'ka-p&-t&l, 'kap-t&l
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin Capitolium, temple of Jupiter at Rome on the Capitoline hill
1 a : a building in which a state legislative body meets b : a group of buildings in which the functions of state government are carried out
2 capitalized : the building in which the United States Congress meets at Washington
Click to expand...

I agree, you spell it right, but I don't think it means what you think it means.

Main Entry: 2capital
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin capitalis, from capit-, caput
2 a : punishable by death <a capital crime> b : involving execution <capital punishment> c : most serious <a capital error>
Click to expand...

Now that you know the difference, I trust you'll be using the correct spelling in the future?

And, I said "near" free fall because there is no real way to know the exact rate. Close is good enough it is all way too fast.
Click to expand...
Way too fast? Compared to what? How do you know they fell too fast? We've still not seen your calculations.

At least there is a logical explanation somewhere.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html
Click to expand...
Somewhere, yes. But not on your site.
 
firecoins said:
Yet you must be right, there was a hidden invisible concret core with invisible explosives placed there by invisible men working for George W. Bush.
Click to expand...

Who was about 21-23 at the time the towers were constructed. Probably still in the Harvard School of Business :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom