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

[jsfisher]

I don't discuss the rate of fall. But menton of the higgh rate of fall, whatever it is happens to be integral to the thread becase that is what we are trying to feasibly explain.

You're gonna get dizzy if you keep spinning like that.

It is not a theory....I learned of the process from a magazine article published in the early 1970's....

You are correct. It is not a theory; it is just another of your convenient fabrications.

 

[Christophera]

How do you hope to create justice when there's no justice system left and the media are (close to 100%) in on it?

The Americans can do it quickly, they just need information.

Would you rather they do not have it?

here is information on the concrete core.

 

[Bell]

Why does it say the last post is by jsfisher, but I find Alfred's drivel instead?

ETA: some forum software/hardware screwup I guess. I blame Darat.

 

[tsig]

I don't discuss the rate of fall. But menton of the higgh rate of fall, whatever it is happens to be integral to the thread becase that is what we are trying to feasibly explain.

Rates of fall are one thing, how they are created is another. A building with a single story could be blown up and the rate of fall would not be an issue due to elevation because the visual explosion would rule.

In the case of a tower the visual event is also important and can influence understanding the rate of fall as well as the determination of collapse or demolition.



They tell us "at least ten years" here.

http://www.ribbands.co.uk/prdpages/C4.htm



It is not a theory.

The C4 is not encapsulated in a slurry form. I feel that C4 would not detonate in that form. A slurry is created from CC4, the rebar dipped in it and then hung to dry. Once the excess solvent has evaporated, returning it to viable explosive form, it is then cast into concrete.

I learned of the process from a magazine article published in the early 1970's which described how navy seal divers discovered and used the process without orders to stay off the bottom using a jack hammer knocking a hole in a sub base wall that engineers were trying to keep secret by not putting on the first set of plans.

They were caught setting off ordinanace without orders, gave up their information to an investigating officer who then handed it to explosives engineers who then developed it into a widespread construction method for self destruct sub bases and missle silos.

Just how many secrets do you know?

And you found them out just by watching TV and reading public articles?

Guess the whole CIA thing was a real waste.

Warning!! I worked in missle silos.

 

[Christophera]

Mind 'shopping an arrow into that photo that points to the concrete core?

the next image down from where this link takes you has the core outlined with a full description.

Oh, yeah, earlier you said our unconscious controls us. Did you mean just us, or did you mean yourself as well?

We are all controlled by our unconscious. Being aware of that make some less controllable because reason can sometimes take over.

 

[Bell]

Just how many secrets do you know?

And you found them out just by watching TV and reading public articles?

Guess the whole CIA thing was a real waste.

Warning!! I worked in missle silos.

Christophera has not watched TV for the last eight years. Or so he claims.

 

[Big Les]

The top fell to the east. Period. Below is raw evidence of it falling to the east. You don't have raw evidence of it falling to the west.

Please explain how some 30 floors of the WTC fell to one side, and suddenly turned around and fell to the other side?

[qimg]http://gulnarasamoilova.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/wtc17.jpg[/qimg]

Hello, Chris - care to make something up to explain this away, just as you have the C4 issue? I'm sure you read a pamphlet on it about 80 years ago that subsequently combusted so that we can't read it too. Or something.

 

[Christophera]

It was not the builders that lied. They are goiing along with the lie.

And you know this ... how? Presumably not stated in this documentary of yours?

Your question does not make sense. I'll do my best with it. The documentary had only to do with what was known about the construction in 1987 when the only core that was known was the concrete core. I can tell from the lack of communication to the public regarding the misinformation from architects and builders they are not the liars but are only going along with the lie

The same thing was stated about the WTC when it was built.

Then why is it that if I Google WTC "concrete core" I only get:

1) Statements by your good self
2) Conspiracy sites like Above Top Secret perpetuating said statements by your good self
3) Official sites about Freedom Tower.

I presume we can assume that Freedom Tower's rebar is the non-C4 coated sort.

The information has been removed from our society, that's why. If you don't think this is possible? You are exactly what the perps are counting on.

But, for me, the big, BIG questions:

WHY ON EARTH did whoever-it-was decide to load up the WTC with explosives, just in case they decided to blow it up at some time in the future?
How did they get round C-4's ten-year shelf life? If they had some special preservative to overcome that to, say, thirty years, how did they know they would need to use it within thirty years? This is utterly, utterly nonsensical.

The shelf life is based on the package life. Concrete lasts longer than cellophane. The building was supposed to last 75 years but some areas, particuarly floors could have leaked air which would have caused a deterioration sooner. Some did not go off. That was all on one side where heat from sunlight perhaps was most intense.

(B.)If everyone knew it was a concrete core and it collapsed, they would REALLY wonder why there were no masssive chunks of concrete.

And they knew this RIGHT from the start? Ah, c'mon. This is INCREDIBLY paranoid.

The above question/statement does not make sense. I said that "If the public knew from the start that the towers had a concrete core then they would really wonder why there were no massive chunks of concrete."

Yes. The strangeness of the security around the rebar was noted as well as the unannounced evacuations of floors by workers just before concrete was poured.

This documentary aired in, what, 1989? Did the authorities just volunteer this information? Did the documentary crew ask if any special security precautions were taken over bog-standard reinforcing rebar (notwithstanding the fact that the WTC was supposed to have a steel core, in fact famous for it).

The above questions are absurd because the documentary crew ONLY knew of the actual concrete core. The steel core is a fabrication that has been in place since 9-11. What is "bog-standard" reinforcing bar?

Unannounced evacuations? Didn't they know when they were going to pour? Are you saying the builders were allowed to wander around the explosive-coated rebar, but were cleared out when the concrete was poured, covering up the evidence?

You are referring to my information about the forced evacuations of the workers on the floors. I remember that the workers in the first instances where there was no announcement were placed in one floor area to wait. After the contractor threatened to sue for the wages he ad to pay out while none were working they compensated him and allowed him to work out a schedule where workers would be moved from one floor area to another. The workers running through the shadowy core hallways was actually shown.

 

[beachnut]

Your question does not make sense. I'll do my best with it. The documentary had only to do with what was known about the construction in 1987 when the only core that was known was the concrete core. I can tell from the lack of communication to the public regarding the misinformation from architects and builders they are not the liars but are only going along with the lie


The shelf life is based on the package life. Concrete lasts longer than cellophane. The building was supposed to last 75 years but some areas, particuarly floors could have leaked air which would have caused a deterioration sooner. Some did not go off. That was all on one side where heat from sunlight perhaps was most intense.


The above question/statement does not make sense. I said that "If the public knew from the start that the towers had a concrete core then they would really wonder why there were no massive chunks of concrete."

The above questions are absurd because the documentary crew ONLY knew of the actual concrete core. The steel core is a fabrication that has been in place since 9-11. What is "bog-standard" reinforcing bar?

.

No concrete core in WTC. Proof has been shown to you over and over!

The only concrete core in this thread is in your head. If you would take the time you have wasted posting on this thread, you could design the WTC and find out why it was strong enough with a steel core!

There are concrete floors, but no concrete cores in the WTC. You are still wrong since you first posted the concrete core. So just to tell you again, there is no core of concrete, wonder when you will figure it out?

 

[tsig]

Christophera has not watched TV for the last eight years. Or so he claims.

Then how how did he see the famous documentary?

 

[Bell]

Then how how did he see the famous documentary?

Somewhere in the early 90's I guess. After that, he threw away his TV, because he couldn't handle the fact that the WTC was rigged with uhmplosives. And this is a logical explanation.

 

[tsig]

Your question does not make sense. I'll do my best with it. The documentary had only to do with what was known about the construction in 1987 when the only core that was known was the concrete core. I can tell from the lack of communication to the public regarding the misinformation from architects and builders they are not the liars but are only going along with the lie





The information has been removed from our society, that's why. If you don't think this is possible? You are exactly what the perps are counting on.



The shelf life is based on the package life. Concrete lasts longer than cellophane. The building was supposed to last 75 years but some areas, particuarly floors could have leaked air which would have caused a deterioration sooner. Some did not go off. That was all on one side where heat from sunlight perhaps was most intense.





The above question/statement does not make sense. I said that "If the public knew from the start that the towers had a concrete core then they would really wonder why there were no massive chunks of concrete."





The above questions are absurd because the documentary crew ONLY knew of the actual concrete core. The steel core is a fabrication that has been in place since 9-11. What is "bog-standard" reinforcing bar?



You are referring to my information about the forced evacuations of the workers on the floors. I remember that the workers in the first instances where there was no announcement were placed in one floor area to wait. After the contractor threatened to sue for the wages he ad to pay out while none were working they compensated him and allowed him to work out a schedule where workers would be moved from one floor area to another. The workers running through the shadowy core hallways was actually shown.

Shadowy hallways and running workers does it get any better?

maybe that's where you met the indian?

 

[twinstead]

Chris, you have forced almost 8500 posts for an untenable position.

Bravo

 

[tsig]

Somewhere in the early 90's I guess. After that, he threw away his TV, because he couldn't handle the fact that the WTC was rigged with uhmplosives. And this is a logical explanation.

You are right Cris style.

Somewhere there must be some sanity, but we monkeys don't seem to find it.

I wish my hair was thicker so I wondn't have to buy clothes.

 

[Big Al]

The information has been removed from our society, that's why. If you don't think this is possible? You are exactly what the perps are counting on.

No, I don't believe every reference everywhere could be expunged. Are you telling me that nobody but you have noticed that their data have disappeared.

The shelf life is based on the package life. Concrete lasts longer than cellophane.

But C-4 doesn't.

The above question/statement does not make sense. I said that "If the public knew from the start that the towers had a concrete core then they would really wonder why there were no massive chunks of concrete."

But they didn't say "They'll wonder where the steel core went"?

The above questions are absurd because the documentary crew ONLY knew of the actual concrete core. The steel core is a fabrication that has been in place since 9-11. What is "bog-standard" reinforcing bar?

Bog-standard is a British phrase meaning boring, ordinary and basic.

I saw a documentary about the WTC well before 9/11 - unlike you, I can't remember the year. I DO remember it mentioning the steel core. Also, websites predating 9/11 mention the steel core - or have they been altered without their webmasters noticing?

You are referring to my information about the forced evacuations of the workers on the floors. I remember that the workers in the first instances where there was no announcement were placed in one floor area to wait. After the contractor threatened to sue for the wages he ad to pay out while none were working they compensated him and allowed him to work out a schedule where workers would be moved from one floor area to another. The workers running through the shadowy core hallways was actually shown.

The documentary had only to do with what was known about the construction in 1987

Yet they also covered labour disputes? How did the info about the subcontractor threatening to sue come out? That wouldn't be evident from still pictures, and the authorities would hardly be likely to divulge it out of the blue.

 

[Bell]

The top fell to the east. Period. Below is raw evidence of it falling to the east. You don't have raw evidence of it falling to the west.

Please explain how some 30 floors of the WTC fell to one side, and suddenly turned around and fell to the other side?

Posted by me, quoted by Big Les...
When are you going to reply to this, Christophera?

Don't forget to bring raw evidence!

 

[tsig]

Posted by me, quoted by Big Les...
When are you going to reply to this, Christophera?

Don't forget to bring raw evidence!

Raw evidence grilled to perfection


Nothing like good BBQ.


Really the fact that steel weakens under heat seems plain, but not to some.

 

[Christophera]

Really the fact that steel weakens under heat seems plain, but not to some.

I always have to get steel to like 2750F to make it melt, bending is not easy under 1500F. I cook chicken with wood at 600F, but it burns, so I cut off the air and smoke/bake at 500F.

There were a few places that got around 600-800F in the towers but not much more and that was probably not at all widespread. The coverage of heat to get steel hot enough to bend is really an issue. Bending tubing requires about 270 degress around it getting near cherry red.

On the towers we had 14 inch tempered steel columns 22 inches C to C and getting enough heat to 3 sides on any column to loose significant strength would not be likely. Realize that the top of the columns at each floor is where the majority of the heat will end up. Which makes the issue of the top of WTC 1 falling south a real mystery if collapse is proposed because about 1/2 of the columns on the north side were severed meaning the top should have fallen north, but it fell south.

 

[tsig]

I always have to get steel to like 2750F to make it melt, bending is not easy under 1500F. I cook chicken with wood at 600F, but it burns, so I cut off the air and smoke/bake at 500F.

There were a few places that got around 600-800F in the towers but not much more and that was probably not at all widespread. The coverage of heat to get steel hot enough to bend is really an issue. Bending tubing requires about 270 degress around it getting near cherry red.

On the towers we had 14 inch tempered steel columns 22 inches C to C and getting enough heat to 3 sides on any column to loose significant strength would not be likely. Realize that the top of the columns at each floor is where the majority of the heat will end up. Which makes the issue of the top of WTC 1 falling south a real mystery if collapse is proposed because about 1/2 of the columns on the north side were severed meaning the top should have fallen north, but it fell south.

Steel does not have to melt to lose strength

The steel was not tempered but quite mild mannered.

 

[hcmom]

I always have to get steel to like 2750F to make it melt,...

So if it prefers other temperatures you're screwed, huh?