• 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:
You are new to this thread. You don't know that I believe some deeply manipulated Muslims did fly planes.

You have not provided a logical explanation for this, which IN NO WAY represents a collapse.

Plane hit the towers and there were fires but that had nothing to do with the towers coming down.

If you think they did then find one image of the steel core columns that were supposedly in the center of the towers, but first, try reading the last 190 pages and you will find that not one image of those core columns from the demolition at some elevation above ground has ever been posted.

That is because FEMA lied and the towers had a steel reinforced cast concrete core.

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

And it was built with high explosives centered and distributed throughout and encapsulated in concrerte to protect it for 33 years so detonators could be planted to initiate the demolition of 9-11
Click to expand...

Why don´t you add all your "truth"-links to your signature, Alfred?
 
Christophera said:
Your explanation for why the wrong tower fell first is about as bad as your explanation for why they both fell the wrong way. Actually you never did explain why WTC 2 fell the wrong way and never did explain why the body fo WTC 2 went east while the top went west.

Basically you and your bsufucating group are trying to cover your evasion with repetitive questioning,

Explain why the top of WTC 2 went west and the body went east. BTW, the concrete core is easily seen inside the perimeter columns just before connecting with WTC 3.
Click to expand...

That's not the answer to the question, Monk. Please explain:

Regnad Kcin said:
Mr. Brown:

You claim that the World Trade Center towers fell in the wrong order. How can you say this when the second jet impacted WTC2 faster (and therefore harder) than the first jet hit WTC1, and did so at a point lower on the building in comparison to the first?

And a quick refresher: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:W...r_9-11_Att.png

- Both planes were identical models
- WTC1 was struck at 490 mph
- There were 11 undamaged stories above WTC1's impact zone
- WTC2 was struck at 590 mph
- There were 25 undamaged stories above WTC2's impact zone

In short, the second tower was hit significantly harder, significantly lower, and fell after a shorter elapsed time, yet you, Mr. Brown, insist it should've fallen second. How can this be?
Click to expand...
 
I love this. Supposedly the number one indicator of evil conspiracy is that the towers fell at free-fall accelerations, i.e. as fast as possible.

Now the claim is that they fell out of sequence - implying that one fell faster than the other!

Perhaps the complex chain of demolition explosives didn't work in WTC1, Christophera, meaning that it fell at the "proper rate", whatever that is?

You can't have it both ways: The buildings both fell as fast as is physically possible / one building fell faster than the other. What the...?

Are you man enough to admit that these two statements are mutually exclusive?
 
Big Al said:
I love this. Supposedly the number one indicator of evil conspiracy is that the towers fell at free-fall accelerations, i.e. as fast as possible.

Now the claim is that they fell out of sequence - implying that one fell faster than the other!

Perhaps the complex chain of demolition explosives didn't work in WTC1, Christophera, meaning that it fell at the "proper rate", whatever that is?

You can't have it both ways: The buildings both fell as fast as is physically possible / one building fell faster than the other. What the...?

Are you man enough to admit that these two statements are mutually exclusive?
Click to expand...

Well, ask Pdoherty. He said that the tipping top of
the tower only could have been stopped by using
explosives. So somehow the goverment managed it
to juggle the buildings with explosives while they were
falling. :boggled: :covereyes
 
Last edited:
Christophera said:
Where were you when the firefighters were mystified because they could find no remains, when the largest piece of anything found which was recognizable to a firefighter was 1/2 of a phone key pad out of all 100's of the desks, chairs, file cabinets and computers in the towers?

Do you suppose that whole bodies were over looked by grief striken rescue personel? Do you suppose families stood by while intact remains were hauled off in trucks to be buried in land fills. Do you suppose they created a masive stink about their loved ones being buried in a dump because the hundreds of searchers just missed the bodies in all their searches?

Deny for as long as you can stand it.

All the evidence is against you on this one. I've posted the links that show it is common knowledge that the towers were pulverized and I've authored a page that explains it.

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

I saw bodies and large pieces of concrete.

But no concrete core, you have made that up and are telling lies now and you are disrespecting the heroes of 9/11 by making up lies. Bad idea.

As for your question of this thread, you have wasted tons of post because the only answer is:

You still are a disrespectful concrete core liar.

You have been waiting for a long time and the answer is;

NO, the buildings did fall; but there was not total pulverization.

No, you can not answer the question because it did not happen, end of thread, end of question.

No ---- because there was not total pulverization.
 
NobbyNobbs said:
Wait..you claim that the weight of the upper floors was insufficient to create the damage seen, yet you have no idea what the weight of those floors are?

And your second sentence is an absolute fabrication. Structural engineers do not come up with their numbers through intuition. They get them through experience and careful calculation.

To sum up:

--C doesn't know how long it took the towers to collapse, but intuition tells him that anything shorter than 2 minutes is too fast.

--C doesn't know how much weight the upper floors represent, but intuition tells him that it wasn't sufficient to create the damage seen.
Click to expand...

Are you tying to assert that you know what kind of structure stood and therefore know how long it should have taken to fall?

If that is the case you will post an image of some of the 47 1,300 foot core columns at an elevation over the ground from the demo images. If you cannot do this, well, you just don't know what you are talking about.

Whereas I can show you the concrete core.
 
Last edited:
Christophera said:
Are you tying to assert that you know what kind of structure stood and therefore know how long it should have taken to fall?

If that is the case you will post an image of some of the 47 1,300 foot core columns at an elevation over the ground from the demo images. If you cannot do, well, you just don't know what you are talking about.

Whereas I can show you the concrete core.
Click to expand...

Forget it, Chris. I´m pretty sure you don´t want to
leave this planet as an isolated, lonesome idiot. You
are in an age where you should think about it.

I don´t care about your answer.
 
Regnad Kcin said:
Mr. Brown:

You claim that the World Trade Center towers fell in the wrong order. How can you say this when the second jet impacted WTC2 faster (and therefore harder) than the first jet hit WTC1, and did so at a point lower on the building in comparison to the first?

And a quick refresher: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:W...r_9-11_Att.png

- Both planes were identical models
- WTC1 was struck at 490 mph
- There were 11 undamaged stories above WTC1's impact zone
- WTC2 was struck at 590 mph
- There were 25 undamaged stories above WTC2's impact zone

In short, the second tower was hit significantly harder, significantly lower, and fell after a shorter elapsed time, yet you, Mr. Brown, insist it should've fallen second. How can this be?
Click to expand...
Christophera said:
Your explanation for why the wrong tower fell first is about as bad as your explanation for why they both fell the wrong way.
Click to expand...
Why?

Actually you never did explain why WTC 2 fell the wrong way and never did explain why the body fo WTC 2 went east while the top went west.
Click to expand...
That's correct, Mr. Brown, I did not explain "why WTC 2 fell the wrong way;" it is not a particular point I'm concerning myself with at the moment. I'm asking you, the auto mechanic, to look at the black smoke coming out from under my hood, not the malfunctioning trunk latch.

Basically you and your bsufucating group are trying to cover your evasion with repetitive questioning,

Explain why the top of WTC 2 went west and the body went east. BTW, the concrete core is easily seen inside the perimeter columns just before connecting with WTC 3.
Click to expand...
Basically you are trying to cover your evasion with repetitive spamming of your website.

Answer the questions, Mr. Brown, and people will not need to repeat them.
 
Christophera said:
No, you lie and distort and you know it. It is an ad hominum attack based on information I divulged to communicate my position with regard to our system of education and law.

It was junior high school and I simply told a teacher off. She had been psychologically abusing me for 3 months in front of the entire class. She finally ran out of things to say so I started talking about her, her motives, that she was abusing me, all of us and that she should retire and make room for a younger teacher that was serious about teaching us from a positon of respect for us.

There was not even any yelling, I was nice.

I was suspended for 3 days then permanantly expelled from the Santa Barbara high school system, not for what I said, but the fact that THE CLASS LISTENED and respected me.
Click to expand...
I apologize - I may have been wrong about the gun.

However - you would not have been permanently expelled from high school for talking calmly in junior high.

Produce evidence of this claim, or admit you're lying.
 
Arus808 said:
Sorry, but NIST has explained it fully in their report, and by your posting here, its evident that you never read it.

Near free fall means the buildingds would have to have fallen completely within hundreths of seconds of 9.1 seconds. The fact taht the NIST state that it could have taken 10 , 12 or as much as 25 seconds proves that it wasn't "near free fall"
Click to expand...

The only part you got right is that I've never read it.

Your grasp of proportions is pitiful, for both strength and relative times for structures of a given strength to fail. Actually it's worse than that, you haven't a clue as to the difference between an explosion and a collapse.

Whasa'a'matta, grow up underground or something?

Example = explosion.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=4120&stc=1&d=1163871911
 

Attachments

  • corefacesexploding.jpg
    corefacesexploding.jpg
    33.8 KB · Views: 2
Last edited:
Regnad Kcin said:
Why?
Answer the questions, Mr. Brown, and people will not need to repeat them.
Click to expand...

Respect the evidence and logic and you will not have to repeat the questions.

Flight 176 hit the south east corner of WTC 2. The body of the tower fell East and the top fell west. . The brown/gray concrete core can be seen inside the perimeter walls.

Not only did the towers fall in the wrong order the tops fell impossibly in the wrong directions and clearly, if the top 10 floors of the tower is falling west, impacts and fires 20 floors lower and on the perpindicuarly opposite side of the building had nothing to do with the demise of these super strong structures.
 
Last edited:
The Almond said:
I think you might mean half and one third the rate of free fall. Anyway, how is that still "too fast?" What criteria are you using to judge what's too fast?
This statement astounds me. The wrong appearance for a collapse? It collapsed. Theories aside, it did collapse.
Even Judy Wood disagrees with you. Her analysis shows that the collapse couldn't have taken longer than 96.7 seconds.
Click to expand...

How could Judy Wood correctly calculate the proper collapse time if she did not know the true design and strcuture that stood?

The towers had a steel reinforced cast concrete core and no other core can be substantiated from raw evidence. If nothing else, this 194 page thread has PROVEN that.

The collapse of a steel reinforced concrete core to the ground, in order to happen in 3 times free fall would have to be a toppling or series of toppling elements which would leave HUGE chunks of concrete.

This, is not a collapse, it is a high speed series of explosions contained within a uniform mineral material.

(Apparently my ability to graphically demonstrate my poin in my posts has been reduced as this image has always worked before)

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=4121&stc=1&d=1163882540
 

Attachments

  • corefacesexploding.jpg
    corefacesexploding.jpg
    33.8 KB · Views: 1
Christophera said:
I've proven the question has no bearing on the event.
Click to expand...

So you've conceded that the order that the towers fell is irrelevant?

So here are the points of your argument so far:

that there was no "free-fall of the towers". christophera has no real idea at all of rate of fall of the towers.

that there was "no pulverisation of the towers" as large chunks of concrete and other parts of the structures remained.

christophera does not know the weight of the upper floors of the towers but still insists, whatever the weight was, it wasn't enough to cause the collapse.

christophera asserts that the towerss fell in the "wrong order" but cannot say why this is and furthermore states that "the question has no bearing on the event"
 
maccy said:
So here are the points of your argument so far....
Click to expand...

Or, put another way, ChristopherA's words mean exactly what he wants the to mean. Nothing more, nothing less.

By "free fall", he means "near free fall", and by "near free fall" he means "too fast", and by "too fast" he means less than "less than two minutes".

By "total pulverization" he means "rubble"

By "wrong order" he means either order.

So, the towers collapsed, first one then the other, in less than two minutes each into a pile of rubble -- proof positive of a conspiracy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom