• 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:
OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Talk to your own. They are the ones that asserted fires on the opposite sides were responsible.
Click to expand...

Another cop out, yet again

REsolve this please

Bonavada has the socks; the topic now is 'total pulverization' of the towers.

By Yahoo Dictionary:

TOTAL {ADJECTIVE}:

Of, relating to, or constituting the whole; entire. See Synonyms at whole.
Complete; utter; absolute: total concentration; a total effort; a total fool.

PULVERIZE {VERB}:
tr.

To pound, crush, or grind to a powder or dust.
To demolish.

So we have four possible meanings:

1. The entire tower was crushed into powder or dust.
2. The entire tower was demolished.
3. The towers were utterly crushed into dust.
4. The towers were utterly demolished.

Now, Chris, in keeping with Bonavada's question, what do you mean by 'total pulverisation', and what is your evidence?

Thanks again!

Everyone else:

STAY ON TARGET....
Click to expand...
 
Ah, yes... high school. Isn't that where you pulled the gun on your teacher, then walked out, never completing a basic education?

But I digress...

How do you explain the large sections of concrete visible in various photographs of the debris?

Hint: Not all of that was concrete 'from the plaza' - a large portion was concrete from the towers.

Hence, no total pulverization occured.

So you can either retract 'total pulverization', or explain the larger-than-sand-and-gravel sized debris visible in MANY pictures of Ground Zero.
 
Christophera said:
No, parts of the NIST report are factual. Entirely false fabrications are most oftem easily detected.

It was caused to be fabricated by individuals associated with the infiltration of the US government.
Click to expand...

Just curious. Do you know who it is that has infiltrated our (i am a people on this thread who is american) government? Care to name names? Nationalities? Planets of origin?
 
Oliver said:
Did they planted the C4 exactly at the impact zones?
I mean was this part of the plan when the buildings were built?
You know the buildings collapses would have started from the
bottom if they were blown, don´t you? :confused:
Click to expand...

Couldn't have planted it exactly at the impact zones because the planes hit the wrong towers. Remember? :rolleyes:
 
Jennie C. said:
Just curious. Do you know who it is that has infiltrated our (i am a people on this thread who is american) government? Care to name names? Nationalities? Planets of origin?
Click to expand...

No, you haven't progressed far enough in your appreciation of truth.
 
Last edited:
zaayrdragon said:
Ah, yes... high school. Isn't that where you pulled the gun on your teacher, then walked out, never completing a basic education?

But I digress...

How do you explain the large sections of concrete visible in various photographs of the debris?

Hint: Not all of that was concrete 'from the plaza' - a large portion was concrete from the towers.

Hence, no total pulverization occured.

So you can either retract 'total pulverization', or explain the larger-than-sand-and-gravel sized debris visible in MANY pictures of Ground Zero.
Click to expand...

You just are not reading, they must have you busy on other forums or mailing lists.
 
Christophera said:
Amazing, are you two pretending to not be able to read and remember? Well I guess Jen just can't read because all of this has been answered a couple of times in this thread.

Both the towers were built with the ground up having 2 explosive circuits each floor of the floor circuit autonoumous from the next. Which is why it took 2 days to rig detonators.

The pilots knew each others targets, as is normal in air attacks, and were told that to hit at certain elevations assured more damage because explosives were planted there.
Click to expand...


Here is the final seconds of the South spire shown in the earlier photo. A violent shock wave from below knocks the remnants of concrete from an area of core wall next to the steel dropping the spire as seen here in an animated gif.

The concrete core is officially top secret, you are not in vilolation of all ethically and moral laws of the land and will be hunted down by the anti-concrete core police. Do not answer the door, move to a concrete building so we can evapoate you!
 
Christophera said:
Amazing, are you two pretending to not be able to read and remember? Well I guess Jen just can't read because all of this has been answered a couple of times in this thread.
Click to expand...
Attack the argument, not the person.

Christophera said:
Both the towers were built with the ground up having 2 explosive circuits each floor of the floor circuit autonoumous from the next. Which is why it took 2 days to rig detonators.
Click to expand...
This is not relevant to your claims of total pulverization.

Christophera said:
The pilots knew each others targets, as is normal in air attacks, and were told that to hit at certain elevations assured more damage because explosives were planted there.
Click to expand...
This is not relevant to your claims of total pulverization.
 
Stay on target; stay on target; stay on target.

This is just a friendly nudge to some of the new (and returning) posters to this thread. In an effort to maintain some level focus to the discussion, we are only allowing one question at a time. That way, we can try to drive towards some sort of conclusion without all the circular arguments, diversions, random asides, and personal attacks.

If I recall correctly, Oliver still has the :socks: and so Oliver's question is still the question, the only question, up for discussion. Once Oliver is satisfied with question has been addressed (at least as best it is going to be), then Oliver will pass the :socks: to whomever asks the next question.

So, with everyone's cooperation, we may get though this. So, please: Stay on target; stay on target; stay on target.
 
Christophera said:
All of the concrete of the tower was reduced to its particulate components. Pulverized.

...under the now seven-story pile of knotted steel and pulverized concrete.
Click to expand...

Wrong, all the concrete of the tower was not pulverized!

124474551a1838e01c.jpg


Wrong, all the concrete of the tower was not pulverized!

12447455d310a46501.jpg


All the concrete of the tower was not pulverized! Why are you telling lies?

Look at the core columns, they have wallboard on them, just wallboard no concrete.

You just are not looking, you must have you busy on other forums or mailing lists.

You have not progressed far enough in your ability to find the truth. You have fallen for the concrete core lies of the government, due to the lack of oxygen in your water. You better watch out or you will miss the truth.
 
I don't want to speak for Bonavada (who has the :socks: at the moment), but if it were me, I'd say the raw evidence shown above (photos of ground zero wreckage) disproves the 'total pulverization' nonsense.

Bonavada, are you satisfied?
 
beachnut said:
Wrong, all the concrete of the tower was not pulverized!

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/124474551a1838e01c.jpg[/qimg]

Wrong, all the concrete of the tower was not pulverized!

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/12447455d310a46501.jpg[/qimg]

All the concrete of the tower was not pulverized! Why are you telling lies?

Look at the core columns, they have wallboard on them, just wallboard no concrete.

You just are not looking, you must have you busy on other forums or mailing lists.

You have not progressed far enough in your ability to find the truth. You have fallen for the concrete core lies of the government, due to the lack of oxygen in your water. You better watch out or you will miss the truth.
Click to expand...

I don't think you have an appreciation for what the images you show mean.

That, (image with the boots) for all intents and purposes, represents pulverized. So much more than a collapse if you do not know now, you will never know.

The other image does not look like concrete from the core or the floors. Site walls probably.
 
Babylon Sister said:
[de-lurk mode] Ya know what Chris? I have been following this thread from the beginning. It been going nearly 6 months, has nearly 7700 posts and 193 pages and you have not made one single convert. If you haven't made any progress after this much time, don't you think it's time to re-evaluate your goals? [/de-lurk mode]
Click to expand...

You don't know that.

I know that no raw evidence for the steel core columns has ever been posted meaning that of those reading many saw that my opposition had a vacuous, empty argument at best and relied on BS text denials and group pretense of mock ignor ance.

I know that no feasible, realistic explanation for near free fall and total pulverization has been put forth except for mine, found here.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html
 
uruk said:
The drawing on the right illustrates what the video shows. The upper section rotated and collapsed straight into the floors below which is exactly what would happen if the steel columns on one side of the core had given away and allowed the mass to move thus gaining momentum. You can't accept it because it goes against your concrete core hypothesis, which, btw, is not backed up by any reliable source.

Your delusion keep you from seeing reality.
Click to expand...

You are basically trying to say that the steel core columns on one side of the building were cut by high explosives. The problem is that cutting half of the 47 columns would require a much larger blast than what we see. The interior box columns can be cut within the blast seen
 and if one 40 foot section of the concrete core was detonated with it the top of the tower would tilt as your diagram shows, except no part would be rotating upwards.


Then, your diagrams completely ignore what happned to the very top of WTC 2 where it fall the opposite direction as the middle part of the tower and lands on top of WTC 3. In this image
 
Last edited:
Arus808 said:
that is a lie (as we know you are a liar). the Experts (thousands of them, you can start at the website http://www.asce.org ) have weighed in an agreed that the official reports accurately describe the events that lead to the buildings collapse.
Click to expand...

Here is what your experts say,

http://www.asce.org/pressroom/news/grwk/event_release.cfm?uid=1584

The team also concluded that fireproofing materials adhered to the steel structure during construction were likely blown off by the impact of planes and thus left the structure more vulnerable to the heat of the fire.

if not for the intense fire ignited by the thousands of pounds of fuel carried by the planes, and fueled by the contents of the buildings, the towers likely would have stood indefinitely. However, the two events occurring simultaneously led to the collapse.




"Likely blown off" Wow, ....... that is really accurate. And wow!, look at all the raw evidence they impliment.

Your reference is not credible and looks like they are blindly supporting the official story whereas my site utilizes raw evidence to prove there was a concrete core and then shows how it was used as a container for plastic explosives that was apart of explosives circuits which actually explains the event seen.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=4102&stc=1&d=1163752719
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom