• 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.
The Almond said:
There's that 3 inch rebar again. Aside from the fact that it doesn't need to exist, it's too heavy to weld into place and it's not in any of the specifications, what else to you have to prove that it's three inches in diameter?
Click to expand...

It is certainly not smaller than 3 inches as that would not even resolve in the photo at the distance this was taken.


The below image shows a column (photo taken from same camera 1 second before the above) which is about 2 feet and the image was taken just before the above which established the size quite well.


And, what makes you think 3 inches is too big to weld in place?

the concrete core is well documented.

http://algoxy.com/conc/core.html
 
Last edited:
Christophera said:
It is certainly not smaller than 3 inches as that would not even resolve in the photo at the distance this was taken.
Click to expand...
Ta-dah! That means...it's not rebar! You're drawing specific conclusions from universal premises. If you're making a valid inference, I should be able to retrace the logic from specific principles to universal ones. Hence, if your photographic evidence shows 3 inch bars at 4 feet on center, I should be able to calculate the shear capacity of the wall, right? When I calculated it out, the design wind load was well over 1000 miles per hour. Please explain to me how this does not invalidate your conclusion.

And, what makes you think 3 inches is too big to weld in place?
Click to expand...


Edited to remove pretention.

Let's have a look at the math, shall we? ASTM provides weights in lbs/ft for all of the bar sizes currently made in the world. Naturally, they didn't include 3" diameter rebars. That not withstanding, we can linearly interpolate from #18 bars at 13 lbs/ft to 17.3 lbs/ft for 3" bars. So at 4 feet long, you've got rebar too heavy for one person to lift into place. But if you're going to just lift everything in 4 foot sections, you're going to make 325 welds per bar, for the entirety of the 25 bars per side, 4 sides in total, or a grand total of 32,500 welds for the concrete core alone.

Long story short, do you have any concept of how heavy steel is?
 
Hello, friends. I've been away for a couple days and am catching up on the thread (where I'm currently on page 194). I'll wager our Mr. Brown has yet to answer my question, however. Why oh why does he want me to keep possession of the socks?
 
Christophera said:
That video doesn't show concrete because it is up to 80 feet below the top of the tower.
Click to expand...
What is up to 80 feet below the top of the tower? The concrete or the film? You're wrong in either case. The video shows no concrete from the initial stages of construction to the top. Steel core columns. No concrete. As plain and simple as it could possibly be.

Watch. The. Video. You. Are. Wrong.
 
Regnad Kcin said:
Hello, friends. I've been away for a couple days and am catching up on the thread (where I'm currently on page 194). I'll wager our Mr. Brown has yet to answer my question, however. Why oh why does he want me to keep possession of the socks?
Click to expand...
We played around with the socks a bit in your absence. But we can leave both yours and zaayrdragon's in play.
 
Well, I see in my absence the socks were ripped from my sweaty mitts. I could swear all were supposed to stay on the topic/question raised by the each stockingholder, but alas. And Mr. Brown was THIS close to cracking.

Ah well, back to enjoying the show.
 
Well, delphi, I'm not optimistic our friend Mr. B will ever concede a point; he's just not wired for it. So my question re: the towers-fell-in-the-wrong-order claim is withdrawn.
 
The Almond said:
Edited to remove pretention.
Click to expand...

The kangaroo cranes lowered the bar into fixtures that held it for the welders. DUH.

Given the fact that you don't recognize the advantage of a tapered 1,300 foot wall, your calculations can be discarded. Sorry, I know you put a lot of work into them but they do not help explain the final event.
 
Again, for those new to the discussion:

Our friend, Christopher A. Brown, asserts the Twin Towers were originally constructed with explosive materials secretly built into each with the intent for them to be someday demolished.

And the reason you laugh and scoff at this idea? As a child, and without your knowledge, you were hypnotized.
 
delphi_ote said:
What is up to 80 feet below the top of the tower? The concrete or the film? You're wrong in either case. The video shows no concrete from the initial stages of construction to the top. Steel core columns. No concrete. As plain and simple as it could possibly be.

Watch. The. Video. You. Are. Wrong.
Click to expand...

Read my post,

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2110671#post2110671

You are misinterpreting the crappy showpiece video. The final call goes to all of the images found at,

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

switchtech said:
It's amazing - following this thread.

Then it's that the roof didn't fall the right way. How do you know what the right way is? The puncture to the windows only marginally influence which direction the structure will collapse, and for the most part, it came straight down, perhaps the top slightly off center (and I don't care where the puncture was relative to the falling debris - it isn't relevant to the actual collapse).
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm answering myself.

I made an error. The hole in the exterior wall did influence the collapse. In fact, without the exterior damage and damage to the heat resistant covering of the central structure (caused by the impact of large, fast jet), the resulting fire (which of course wouldn't have started in the first place because how else do you get a jet plane load of jet fuel in?) would probably not have caused this type of collapse.

How do I know? I just read the NIST report! Well, certain portions of it, anyway.

The damaged allowed the supporting structures inside the building to pull away from the external structure and the internal damage allowed the heat to affect the central steel core to weaken.

Another odd point: Christophera is apparently correct that the central core collapsed slower than the rest of the building. The NIST report indicates the core stood for a bit after the rest of the building began collapsing - but the ensuing damage caused by fire and impact at its base caused it also to collapse in short order (if I read the report correctly).

Direct quote from NIST FAQ:
Answers to Frequently Asked Questions

...From video evidence, significant portions of the cores of both buildings (roughly 60 stories of WTC 1 and 40 stories of WTC 2) are known to have stood 15 to 25 seconds after collapse initiation before they, too, began to collapse. Neither the duration of the seismic records nor video evidence (due to obstruction of view caused by debris clouds) are reliable indicators of the total time it took for each building to collapse completely.

...
Click to expand...

To see the report for yourself - visit wtc dot nist dot gov (since I'm a newbie - I don't' think I can post links yet). (I apparently need some sort of parenthetic intervention, half my post is inside parenthesis!)

jbs
 
Christophera said:
You are misinterpreting the crappy showpiece video.
Click to expand...
Showpiece? I guess this video was pre-faked, just like the towers were pre-built with explosives? They knew they were going to blow up the towers 20 years later and designed an entirely false video?

Nevermind that you can actually watch the tower being built. Never mind that it makes a complete fool of you. Nevermind that you yourself use a documentary you can't even prove exists as your sole piece of evidence for your horrible accusations. :rolleyes:
 
delphi_ote said:
Showpiece? I guess this video was pre-faked, just like the towers were pre-built with explosives? They knew they were going to blow up the towers 20 years later and designed an entirely false video?

Nevermind that you can actually watch the tower being built. Never mind that it makes a complete fool of you. Nevermind that you yourself use a documentary you can't even prove exists as your sole piece of evidence for your horrible accusations. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Yea, never mind that in 198 pages of me asking for ONE image of steel columns in the core area from a demo image showing them at an elevation off the ground, not one image has been produced.

All the while I'm producing image after image showing what can only be concrete.

You folks have been deceived by authority.
 
Last edited:
Someone once told me that invoking the bunny with a pancake on its head was a surefire way of euthanizing a thread.

This thread seems to be long overdue for euthanasia, so here goes:

bunny-pancake.jpg
 
LashL said:
Someone once told me that invoking the bunny with a pancake on its head was a surefire way of euthanizing a thread.

This thread seems to be long overdue for euthanasia, so here goes:

[qimg]http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g115/Jazz99/bunny-pancake.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

OMG!

That explains how 110 floors pancaked. We all know how quickly bunnies propagate.
 
Chris,

How about we accept that both sides don't have anything more to say on this matter and just post pictures and chat for a bit?

I like it when you tell jokes.

Matthew

:bunpan
 
You know, there should be a rule: that once an OP is answered, the thread gets closed.

This OP was answered: there was nothing to explain. End of story.

But the thread goes on and on and on...
 
Christophera said:
Yea, never mind that in 198 pages of me asking for ONE image of steel columns in the core area from a demo image showing them at an elevation off the ground, not one image has been produced.
Click to expand...
Watch the steel columns get put into place in the video. Was the video faked?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom