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

[Christophera]

Agreed.

Look at the sequence again using the building directly in front of the collapsing tower as a reference. To me, the spire is too right of center to be alleged concrete core. Could it possibly be a remnant of the outer wall, after the floors have been sheared away, but before the wall's final collapse?

You are way off. With estimation skills like that you'll get nowhere.

The spire is the left corner of the interior box columns that surounded the core.

Try this,

http://algoxy.com/psych/images/wtc32.1corealign.jpg

realize that you are looking at the narrow west end of WTC 1's core.

Check this too.

http://algoxy.com/conc/core.html

 

[Arus808]

If you do not know what would be rebar remnants from a 1,300 foot tall shear wall in the below linked image, you should withdraw from the discussion.

3" REBAR ON 4' CENTERS​

ludicrous, christ. we dont have to prove anything to you. ITs your job to prove what you claim to us.
We have reality on our side.

Why should I withdraw from a discussion that apparently proves you wrong?

Assume that someone doesn't know what rebar is, illustrate for us where in that image where the rebar is.

 

[Arus808]

ANd WTC 2 was hardly damaged compared to WTC 1. The very top of WTC 2 fell west

oh? it seems to me that a plane hit wtc 1 and WTC 2. the damge was more severe to WTC 2 since the plane hit it more on the side then straight on.

 

[Arus808]

You can distort anything you choose but you cannot provide raw evidence to support your rarely made assertion that the towers had steel core columns inthe core.

I document the concrete core with raw evidence.

http://algoxy.com/conc/core.html

you do not have raw evidence on that page.

Please define , what "raw" evidnece is to you because it seems thta You dont understand what raw is.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

There are periphery subjects that are legitimate to engage temporarily.

Nice try.

How can I be evading when I've replied to your weak effor to show the scenario preesnted here, [spam link removed] logically showing how and why the wrong tower fell first.

Your "reply:"

Simple logic says that the first tower hit, hit hardest, burned worst, will fall first IF PLANE IMPACTS AND FIRES ARE RESPONSIBLE.

And my response:

Except...

The first tower was not "hit hardest;" please retract your assertion.

The second tower was hit lower than the first, leaving a greater weight above the damage.

The towers' collapse sequence as transpired adheres not only to "simple logic" but physics as well.

You may retract your assertions and correct your website. You will, won't you?

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Mr. Brown:

Say someone hands Bob ten 300 page, hardcover books, and his twin brother Tony one hundred volumes of the same. Whose legs will give out first?

 

[hcmom]

Mr. Brown:

Say someone hands Bob ten 300 page, hardcover books, and his twin brother Tony one hundred volumes of the same. Whose legs will give out first?

The one the government planted bombs in.

 

[Christophera]

And still un-detonated ?

At least forty feet was detonated from the top.

You didn't explain where I contradicted myself. Show me the images and what descriptions/explanations you think I applied.

No one has shown me that the cutting charges detailed here would not produce the cuts shown.

You find your answer about how the rebar and interior box columns survived here.

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

I may have said there was also dust in the image, but I'm not sure of which image you refer to. i do not post images of just dust.

 

[Christophera]

The one the government planted bombs in.

The infiltrators of the US government built the towers to demolish.

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

Are you going to help them get away with it?

 

[Christophera]

Mr. Brown:

Say someone hands Bob ten 300 page, hardcover books, and his twin brother Tony one hundred volumes of the same. Whose legs will give out first?

Give the same brothers respective numbers of sheets of toilet paper and have a mosquito bite them on the elbow and knee respectively. Ask the same question.

 

[Christophera]

you do not have raw evidence on that page.

Please define , what "raw" evidnece is to you because it seems thta You dont understand what raw is.

I know raw core evidence and you have no evidence at all.

 

[Christophera]

oh? it seems to me that a plane hit wtc 1 and WTC 2. the damge was more severe to WTC 2 since the plane hit it more on the side then straight on.

Is that why no one survived above impact on WTC 1?

 

[Christophera]

ludicrous, christ. we dont have to prove anything to you. ITs your job to prove what you claim to us.
We have reality on our side.

Why should I withdraw from a discussion that apparently proves you wrong?

Assume that someone doesn't know what rebar is, illustrate for us where in that image where the rebar is.

Because you have no evidence and know nothing about construction and cannot support the bogus official story which does not explained towers pulverized in mid air.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=4005&stc=1&d=1163126859

 

[Christophera]

Unfortunately, there are millions of people who "know" God talks to them, who "know" they've been abducted by aliens, who "know" they can read auras, etc.

Knowing is not as reliable as you think.

I don't have to think because I know and have evidence which matches what I know, whereas you have no evidence so must think overtime on how to distort the evidence which exists.

 

[Trigood]

I cannot believe there are over 7000 replies on this thread.

Doesn't it just boil down to this:

Christophera: There were concrete cores in the towers. I know this, regardless of any evidence to the contrary. So there!

JREFer X: There is no evidence there were concrete cores. Wake up from your insanity-drenched hallucination.

Truly, what is there to talk about for 7000+ posts????

I would read it to put myself to sleep except that Alfred's avatar (well, 1/3rd of it) gives me MAJOR creeps.

 

[hcmom]

The infiltrators of the US government built the towers to demolish.

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

Are you going to help them get away with it?

Yes, if my only two choices are you and them.

 

[Christophera]

there is nothing, NO-THING, ZILCH, NOWT, in that picture that could be described with even a minute amout of certainty as a CONCRETE SHEAR WALL. all i can see is a badly pixellated image of what i presume to be steel forms and SMOKE and DUST.
sometimes what is not seen is there chris but what is not there is not seen.
you are blind to everything bar your own fallacies chris.

toodle-pip

BV

With great certainty all images which should show the steel core columns if they existed do not show steel core columns.

Here is the full sized image. No steel core colums and there is that concrete shear wall holding up the spire formed of the interior box column.

 

[Christophera]

Yes, if my only two choices are you and them.

Dark flowers die if you bring them into the light.

 

[Christophera]

I would read it to put myself to sleep except that Alfred's avatar (well, 1/3rd of it) gives me MAJOR creeps.

Our nation and all that it stands for wil never know justice again after the blood of innocent people was mixed with the sand and gravel of the exploding concrete core. Mothers will weep for many millenia and their children will be murdered over and over again.

 

[jsfisher]

You are way off. With estimation skills like that you'll get nowhere.

Hey, genius, you are looking at the wrong tower. My post and the post I quoted both referred to the first tower's collapse.

I know it's tough, but please try to keep up.

May be this will be easier to absorb: The phantom spire appearing in a cloud of dust during the first tower's collapse is in the wrong place to by your illusive concrete core. It is, however, right about where a remnant of the outer wall might have been.