• 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:
Dark flowers die if you bring them into the light.
Click to expand...

There is something I'd love to say here, but since it's very close to purely mean, without much funny in it (except to me...) I'm satisfying myself by saying that I want to say it.
 
jsfisher said:
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.
Click to expand...

The WTC core
 
jsfisher said:
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.
Click to expand...

The WTC 2 core and the spire of WTC 1 are 2 different towers and cannot be correlated except for the phase of the demo.
 
Mobyseven said:
And I repeat...the pain hurts so good.

I'm hoping by posting this again that he might at least give us some clue as to when the documentary aired, what it was called...I dunno.

Perhaps it exists on a higher metaphysical plane.
Click to expand...

Gawd, ......... if you just would have read the thread.

It was aired in 1990, production began in 1987. It was called "the Construction Of the twin Towers", it was 2 hours in length on 2 consecutive nights. Viewed on channel 28, (cahnnel 10 in Santa Barbara), produced by PBS, since removed from their archives and records as existent by those that can build 1,300 foot towers with explosive cast into the concrete.
 
belz said:
Originally Posted by Christophera
Those are not core columns. The rectangular frames shown are of the outer frameworks inner wall. The same frames are seen in the image annotated as "MASSIVE BOX COLUMNS". Notice that ONLY the columns ringing the core are labeled MASSIVE. Those columns are also the spire.

Originally Posted by Christophera
homer,
You are embarrasing humanity with your constant misrepresentations.

NOTICE: homer has not provided a reasonable explanation for what the fine vertical elements are IF they are not rebar.
Funny.
Click to expand...

belz said:
You manage to contradict yourself in two consecutive posts. Guess that solves the question of your memory.
Click to expand...

So where did I contradict myself?
 
jsfisher said:
And, by the way, nothing in my post merited your snide barb. Keep your unwarranted ad hom attacks to yourself, please.
Click to expand...

Sorry.

Have you ever tried to defend common sense backed with quality evidence against overwhelming odds having no evidence?
 
Christophera said:
One bad evasion deserves a good one.
Click to expand...
Nonsense.

Your basic explanation does not fit the event and you are not addressing the factors of the towers falling in the wrong directions compared to the faces impacted.
Click to expand...
I am not "addressing the factors" apart from the ones I choose. For instance, your claim that the towers fell in the wrong sequence. Let's get back to that.

I at least have a permanent statement which is comprehensive to all those factors and others.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html#anchor1207667
Click to expand...
Your continued spamming of this thread (and others) with links to your site is in direct violation of your membership agreement. Is it your wish to be once again suspended from this forum?
 
Christophera said:
The WTC 2 core and the spire of WTC 1 are 2 different towers and cannot be correlated except for the phase of the demo.
Click to expand...
Perhaps the word, 'spire', is the source of confusion, here. However, praise be to the forum gods, for now I can post URL's.

This is the spire/tower/whatever to which I refer: http://amanzafar.no-ip.com/WTC/wtc41.JPG. It is in the wrong place to be your "concrete core." It is in the right place to be an outer wall, as can be seen in the related sequence of pictures here: http://amanzafar.no-ip.com/WTC/
 
Now then, Mr. Brown, since you evaded my question regarding the relative weight of two stacks of books, let me ask this:

Which is heavier:

A) 11 stories of a World Trade Center tower
B) 25 stories of a World Trade Center tower

Take your pick. I know you can do it.
 
Christophera said:
Sorry.

Have you ever tried to defend common sense backed with quality evidence against overwhelming odds having no evidence?
Click to expand...

the expert was

chief structural engineer and senior vice president of ABS Consulting Inc. in Oakland, Calif., Hamburger is a member of an engineering team commissioned by the Structural Engineers Institute of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) to assess the performance of the WTC and surrounding buildings in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks.
Click to expand...

My letter was to check the report a guy with concrete core in his head has posted saying concrete core. I asked them why they had the concrete core. They replied, and the guy who wrote that section with the error said:

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...

http://www.ncsea.com/downloads/wtcseerp.pdf

just in case a CT is too smart and rants the following note is added

the report was prepared by August Domel, Jr., Ph.D., S.E., P.E. who used the work of others in the preparation (just a note to the, Ron did not write the report CT rant, no CT ranters, Ron's information was used when August prepared the report!)
Click to expand...

ignore real stuff and relax
 
Regnad Kcin said:
Now then, Mr. Brown, since you evaded my question regarding the relative weight of two stacks of books, let me ask this:

Which is heavier:

A) 11 stories of a World Trade Center tower
B) 25 stories of a World Trade Center tower

Take your pick. I know you can do it.
Click to expand...

You are not explaining total pulverization therefore you must explain why WTC 1 fell south when 2/3 of the perimeter wall on the north was destroyed.

No, .......... fire will not explain it. EVER. No way can enough heat be concentrated on the perimeter columns to equal 2/3 removal on the opposite side.
 
Last edited:
beachnut said:
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.
Click to expand...

I quote your expert. Now come up with where the "well-defined core" is documented beside the paper he wrote that contradicts what he says and his name is not on the paper.

The PDF clearly says;

By:
August Domel , Jr., Ph.D., SE.,P.E
November 2001

CHAPTER 2: GROUND ZERO OPERATIONS AT THE WORLD
TRADE CENTER
2.1 General
Groundbreaking for construction of the World Trade Center took place on August 5, 1966. Tower One, standing 1368 feet high, was completed in 1970, and Tower Two, at 1362 feet high, was completed in 1972. The structural design for the World Trade Center Towers was done by Skilling, Helle, Christiansen and Robertson. It was designed as a tube building that included a perimeter moment-resisting frame consisting of steel columns spaced on 39-inch centers. The load carrying system was designed so that the steel facade would resist lateral and gravity forces and the interior concrete core would carry only gravity loads.
Click to expand...

Any more of this and you are going to be guilty along with Hamburger, of fraud.

There is NO raw evidence whatsoever for the steel core columns. But, there is this, which cannot be anything but concrete substantiating the Domel report.


ON EDIT:

The website
http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/experts/index.html

Lists Hamburger with;

Experts on Parade

A bunch of frauds
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom