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

[uruk]

Certainly an outright lie when not one image of any of the supposed 47, 1,300 fot steel core columns has been produced while prodigious evidence for the concrete core, also disproving steel core columns has been consistently provided.

One website with conjecture and assumptions as opposed to thousands of websites backed up with research and facts. I think you need to look up the definition of "prodigious".

And this provision of raw evidence has always been done in an effort to provide knowledge which can be used to establish lawful government and protect life, while,........... the opposition will not even state their reasons for opposing what must be the truth.

We'll add delusions of grandure to the list.

 

[maccy]

If you cannot provide these above, then you have shown yourself to be intellectually dishonest (oh what a surprise)

I disagree, by not providnig the things you list, for 180 pages (and for the best part of six months), Christophera is merely demonstrating that he has a mental illness and is impervious to reason - seeing all confrontation as justification for his paranoid fantasies.

I really don't understand why people keep trying to get Christophera to accept their arguments, there is absolutely no reason to expect that he ever will.

Christophera has already lost the argument - everybody sees this except for him. Trying to force him to admit this loss is therefore pointless and I don't believe it's helping him with his illness.

Christophera doesn't have the self-awareness to be intellectually dishonest and any kind of confrontation, argument or insult is not going to help him gain this awareness.

The best that we can hope is that if we leave this thread alone, Christophera will devote less time to repeating his delusions and may, in a moment of refelection, seek help for his condition.

Christophera's ideas are too ridiculous to influence anybody and have, at any rate, been debunked several times on this thread. Reason has already prevailed, there is nothing to be gained from continuing to argue.

Edited to add:

As we've rolled over another page - and that seems to be a groudhog day like process of everybody repeating themselves - here's my paranoia quote once more:

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.

http://hmiworld.org/hmi/issues/Jan_F..._paranoia.html emphasis mine.

 

[bonavada]

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?

sorry been away from the madness for a while....

i've puzzled many times over this exact question. i have quite a few vids of the apperance of the spire during collapse and i must say it does seem, in most of them, that what we/you suspect seems very possible. in particular there is long-distance footage (shot by CNN i think) which graphically illustrates this. i'll hunt it down and you-tube it here. tomorrow that'll be though.....

BV

 

[Christophera]

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

Uh, ....... we don't have anything to make a raw evidence list for the deniers of the concrete core unless it were a number of misrepresentations used in rare attempts.

Let us see, ........

There is the picture not looking at the core where some poor decieved canadian says "Look at the core columns"

Or there is the aerial photo which shows the interior box columns ringing the core, but none of the same large columns inside the core, where some pitifully duped german says, "Look at the core columns". When really the image shows elevator guide rail supports.

Their favorite is the interior box column laying on the ground with floor beams conneted to it getting scrapped out where they say, "Look at the core columns"

The entire time never showing an image of one of the 47, 1,300 steel columns actually inside the core let alone providing a logical explanaton for this

 

[Christophera]

One website with conjecture and assumptions as opposed to thousands of websites backed up with research and facts. I think you need to look up the definition of "prodigious".


We'll add delusions of grandure to the list.

We can say that thousands of websites that do not explain what must be the worlds most sophisticated Demolition.

 

[stateofgrace]

Chris I ask this in all seriousness,

Is there anything and I mean anything that will anybody could offer up that would convince you that the Towers were not demolished and did not have concrete cores?

 

[stateofgrace]

Any comment Chris?

 

[delphi_ote]

Chris I ask this in all seriousness,

Is there anything and I mean anything that will anybody could offer up that would convince you that the Towers were not demolished and did not have concrete cores?

Earlier, he explicitly stated that nothing would change his mind.

 

[twinstead]

People who are crazy don't know they are crazy. According to them the rest of the world is crazy.

We will never convince Chris he is wrong. He could be sent back in time and be shown the entire construction holding hands with the ghost of Christmas past, see NO concrete core being poured, and I would bet every penny I have ( I have about 423) Chris would not believe it.

It's the nature of the affliction.

 

[Christophera]

Chris I ask this in all seriousness,

Is there anything and I mean anything that will anybody could offer up that would convince you that the Towers were not demolished and did not have concrete cores?

I know enough about the uses of high explosives to know that IF there were steel core columns the event of the towers falling at near free fall would have looked and sounded completely different than they did.

I sat for 2 hours watching a documentary about the construction of WTC 1 and over an hour of it focused on the difficult construction of the worlds largest, steel reinforced cast concrete tubular core.


I know that well contained, optimally placed and distributed high explosives can cause concrete to pulverize the concrete to its particulate components instantly to fall.

There is nothing to offer. No alternatives that are reasonable and logical. The explanation was done as documented with evidence and logic here.

 

[Christophera]

People who are crazy don't know they are crazy. According to them the rest of the world is crazy.

We will never convince Chris he is wrong. He could be sent back in time and be shown the entire construction holding hands with the ghost of Christmas past, see NO concrete core being poured, and I would bet every penny I have ( I have about 423) Chris would not believe it.

It's the nature of the affliction.

Speak of delusions of granduer. You can't even come up with a single image of a steel core column in the core area.

 

[Christophera]

Any comment Chris?

We have 2 interior box columns on the left with torch cut ends and some men working with a salvage lance on the right. Note the cut on the end of the piece they work on is way smotter than any torch cut. Note there are no bolt holes or plates, flanges or any other sign of how that column end was joind with another.

That column end was cut with cutting charges built into the floors

 

[Christophera]

I disagree, by not providnig the things you list, for 180 pages (and for the best part of six months), Christophera is merely demonstrating that he has a mental illness and is impervious to reason - seeing all confrontation as justification for his paranoid fantasies.

Classic BS. in those 180 pages there has not been one image of the steel core columns the deniers mostly fail to support as existent.

The evidence I provide of the concrete core also provides proof there were no steel core columns. So it is no wonder you clutter up this thread with baseless denial and then apply ad hominum attack. There is nothing else you can do.

 

[Arus808]

The evidence I provide of the concrete core also provides proof there were no steel core columns. So it is no wonder you clutter up this thread with baseless denial and then apply ad hominum attack. There is nothing else you can do.

what you have is not evidence.

 

[stateofgrace]

I know enough about the uses of high explosives to know that IF there were steel core columns the event of the towers falling at near free fall would have looked and sounded completely different than they did.

I sat for 2 hours watching a documentary about the construction of WTC 1 and over an hour of it focused on the difficult construction of the worlds largest, steel reinforced cast concrete tubular core.


I know that well contained, optimally placed and distributed high explosives can cause concrete to pulverize the concrete to its particulate components instantly to fall.

There is nothing to offer. No alternatives that are reasonable and logical. The explanation was done as documented with evidence and logic here.

No is sufficient Chris.

 

[jsfisher]

You would be the first person to question that.

...and your point is?

 

[twinstead]

Speak of delusions of granduer. You can't even come up with a single image of a steel core column in the core area.

Well, you've been shown DOZENS of pictures of just that, DURING CONSTRUCTION for Christ's sake.

You can't talk to a psycho like a normal human being...

 

[Christophera]

Well, you've been shown DOZENS of pictures of just that, DURING CONSTRUCTION for Christ's sake.

You can't talk to a psycho like a normal human being...

How come I always post proof of the concrete core but you always SAY there's; tons, lots, dozens, many, etc. and then not post any?

Then I have to post what you THINK is your evidence and explain it to you. What you think is an image showing steel core columns is actually showing "MASSIVE BOX COLUMNS" which are not in the core area. What is in the core area are much smaller and are not "core columns" the are elevator guide rail supports.

 

[Christophera]

what you have is not evidence.

Clearly, you wouldn't know evidence of something you do not want to know.

The concrete core is well established but folks don't want to know of it because then it would mean they should unify and purify their government of the infiltrators that killed 3,000 on 9-11.

People do not want to do that and have become so ignorant of their needs that they do not know they need to do that in order to preserve the comfort and security they really cherish (not to mention their rights and freedoms they take for granted) they must get over the false divisions media has created over the last few generations.

Then again some of them draw a handsome salary to come here and obfuscate quality evidence and try and confuse the average reader with naseless denial and misrepresentations of fraudulent evidence trying to sunstantiate towers that never existed.

 

[twinstead]

Then again some of them draw a handsome salary to come here and obfuscate quality evidence and try and confuse the average reader with naseless denial and misrepresentations of fraudulent evidence trying to sunstantiate towers that never existed.

Oh great, the old 'paid government shill' argument. The average reader? The average reader thinks, like we do, that you are full of CRAP.

Chris, do you have any idea how much of a cliche that is? "draw a handsome salary"? LOL Jesus dude everybody else in the world, even those who think 911 was an inside job, disagrees with you. I mean EVERYBODY.

What does that tell you?