• 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:
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.
Click to expand...

DAMN! >.< Forgot that one on the list...


Christophera's raw evidence list:

1.) PBS documentary "The Construction Of the twin Towers" - NO evidence
2.) Explosives placed inside the towers during construction - NO evidence
3.) Airplanes hitting the wrong towers - NO evidence
4.) The fires inside the towers going out - NO evidence
5.) The wrong tower falling first - NO evidence

And the concrete core? - NO evidence, beside a misprint in a book, a faulty diagram from the BBC website on 9/12/01 and a grainy picture that shows nothing more but a dark shape behind dustclouds.

You are still doing swell, Christophera :rolleyes:
 
Bell said:
How about you showing us some evidence?


Christophera's raw evidence list:

1.) Explosives placed inside the towers during construction - NO evidence
2.) Airplanes hitting the wrong towers - NO evidence
3.) The fires inside the towers going out - NO evidence
4.) The wrong tower falling first - NO evidence

And the concrete core? - NO evidence, beside a misprint in a book, a faulty diagram from the BBC website on 9/12/01 and a grainy picture that shows nothing more but a dark shape behind dustclouds.

You are still doing swell, Christophera :rolleyes:
Click to expand...


How about you practicing selectivity in another area of life? Oh, and get some evidence for the steel core columns you consistenty don't support and have always failed to support?

Talk about cognitive distortions!! Well, actually, some are just errors. Like 2. 3. & 4. These are factors not evidence.

But, the last paragraph are Overgeneralizations - taking isolated cases and using them to make wide generalizations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_distortions

Misprint?
9. Labelling - related to overgeneralization, explaining by naming.


faulty diagram?
9. Labelling - related to overgeneralization, explaining by naming.


dark shape? These are generalizations
6. Magnification and Minimization - exaggerating negatives and understating positives.

http://algoxy.com/conc/core.html
 
OK, a new page so I'm going to say it again:

maccy said:
Dear all,

I think it's clear to all by now that Christophera is seriously deluded and that his arguments won't convince anybody. It's also clear that he will never change his mind.

I'm concerned that continuing to argue with him only serves to fuel his delusions so I'm suggesting that everybody stops replying to this thread, if only for Christophera's sake.

If we ignore him, maybe there's a chance he'll seek the help that he so obviously needs.

So, please please stop posting and let this thread die.
Click to expand...


I really don't get why people are still bothering with this thread...
 
Bell said:
All three staircases where blocked of by the plane's impact. That was the cause nobody was able to escape from above the impact damage at the norrth tower. Common knowledge.
Click to expand...

Oh yea, WTC 1 was hit harder and burned worse. Common knowledge.
 
Christophera said:
How about you practicing selectivity in another area of life? Oh, and get some evidence for the steel core columns you consistenty don't support and have always failed to support?
Click to expand...

I will, after you have provided evidence for all the claims you make.

Talk about cognitive distortions!! Well, actually, some are just errors. Like 2. 3. & 4. These are factors not evidence.
Click to expand...

Errors on your behalve? Are you thus willing to retract those statements?

But, the last paragraph are Overgeneralizations - taking isolated cases and using them to make wide generalizations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_distortions

Misprint?
9. Labelling - related to overgeneralization, explaining by naming.


faulty diagram?
9. Labelling - related to overgeneralization, explaining by naming.


dark shape? These are generalizations
6. Magnification and Minimization - exaggerating negatives and understating positives.

<spam>
Click to expand...

How's about spending so time and draw some arrows on your concrete core picture to show us where the rebar is instead of looking up what is wrong with you on Wikipedia. You could have produced said picture in the time it took you too search and quote Wikipedia.
 
Christophera said:
Clearly, you haven't read it.

They have no evidence and must spam it continually with unsupported denial.
Click to expand...

Christophera's raw evidence list:

1.) PBS documentary "The Construction Of the twin Towers" - NO evidence
2.) Explosives placed inside the towers during construction - NO evidence
3.) Airplanes hitting the wrong towers - NO evidence
4.) The fires inside the towers going out - NO evidence
5.) The explosives were on timers - NO evidence
6.) The wrong tower falling first - NO evidence

And the concrete core? - NO evidence, beside a misprint in a book, a faulty diagram from the BBC website on 9/12/01 and a grainy picture that shows nothing more but a dark shape behind dustclouds.

You are still doing swell, Christophera :rolleyes:
 
Bell said:
Christophera's raw evidence list:

1.) PBS documentary "The Construction Of the twin Towers" - NO evidence
2.) Explosives placed inside the towers during construction - NO evidence
3.) Airplanes hitting the wrong towers - NO evidence
4.) The fires inside the towers going out - NO evidence
5.) The explosives were on timers - NO evidence
6.) The wrong tower falling first - NO evidence

And the concrete core? - NO evidence, beside a misprint in a book, a faulty diagram from the BBC website on 9/12/01 and a grainy picture that shows nothing more but a dark shape behind dustclouds.

You are still doing swell, Christophera :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Bell, why do you continue with this?
 
christophera, i think this may have been asked before but it's a question worth repeating:-

what are your motives in defending your position here?

you have steadfastly reiterated every aspect of your site many many times for months now here. in that time you have failed to convert anyone to your cause. why aren't you out there "bullhorning" this (what would be) world-shattering information to everyone, the mass-media, local polititians academics etc etc? why stick around here where you are unceasingly battered from pillar to post?

don't you realise this thread has now run it's course? its over mate accept it. move on FFS.............

or is it as simple as just a way to bump up the hits on your site? BTW how many hits have you had since you started this thread? and how many hits prior to it?

BV
 
maccy said:
Bell, why do you continue with this?
Click to expand...

To remind Christophera that he has no evidence of his wacked out claims. And as long as he is spamming with the same pictures and links to his website again and again, I see no reason why I should not do so with this list ;)

I'm gonna take a shower now, freshen up a bit. Hope that relaxes me a bit :)
 
Bell said:
To remind Christophera that he has no evidence of his wacked out claims. And as long as he is spamming with the same pictures and links to his website again and again, I see no reason why I should not do so with this list ;)

I'm gonna take a shower now, freshen up a bit. Hope that relaxes me a bit :)
Click to expand...

Have you considered that maybe Christophera is paranoid and that by confronting him you are exacerbating his condition?

Therapists who want to maintain a working alliance with a paranoid patient must avoid becoming the object of projection. They should provide models of non-paranoid behavior, and not allow themselves to become either an aggressor or a victim. The therapist must build trust gradually, without trying to be too friendly, and avoid showing of anger or defensiveness. Complete honesty is essential because people with paranoid tendencies are highly sensitive to deception and holding back.

Disputing or otherwise directly confronting paranoid beliefs is ineffective, and interpretations will be regarded mainly as accusations. Instead, the therapist must help patients acknowledge the feelings they have been defending themselves against.
Click to expand...

http://hmiworld.org/hmi/issues/Jan_Feb_2005/around_paranoia.html emphasis mine.

I think that:

a. you will never convince Christophera that there is no evidence for what he is saying (in fact, you will only reinforce his delusions by confronting him); and

b. Christophera's evidence is so weak that it will convince nobody other than him.

Therefore continuing to argue with Christophera in this thread is pointless and quite probablt damaging to his mental health.
 
Christophera said:
Meaning you have not explained what these very fine vertical elements are that are standing free IF they are not rebar.[/center]






I just proved you are not only wrong and incapable of explaining what I know to be rebar but I also showed you are dishonest.



homer,

The above is pure bunk. You knew there was a difference between the image http://home.comcast.net/~jeffrey.king2/wsb/media/56016/site1074.jpg and http://home.comcast.net/~jeffrey.king2/spire_dust-3.jpg 60 pages back. You are trying to pretend there is confusion to evade providing a real answer.

Time for you to actually do something. Like come up with an image of the steel core columns inside the core area at some elevation above the ground.

Or, if you cannot do that try explaining what this image of the WTC 2 core shows if it is NOT concrete.
Click to expand...

Ok, lets take a closer look at what those fine elements are.
If you look at the photos below you will see that what you point as rebar is actually JPEG compression errors and dust trails.
The following video confirms the dust trail following the columns.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO2cQOC7hxY
Look at 00:37 for the dust trail following the column
and look at 00:46 and 00:47 to see the "spire" falling straight down which also corresponds with the pictures.
 

Attachments

  • site1074annotated.JPG
    site1074annotated.JPG
    61.2 KB · Views: 12
  • spire_dust-3annotated.JPG
    spire_dust-3annotated.JPG
    31 KB · Views: 9
  • sequence.JPG
    sequence.JPG
    15.3 KB · Views: 10
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom