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

[Architect]

Now you see what a great conspiracy this is:

1. They hypnotised the entire US population, except maybe Chris, and somehow all of us in other countries too. Whooooweee.

2. They made everyone forget, from construction workers to engineers, forget about all the concrete they poured. Including the magic C4 explsove coated rebar you can't prove existed. And removed all records. And blueprints. Impressive, eh? Thousands of people and tens of thousands of written records.

3. They magicked away a PBS documentary showing a concrete core, despite it perhaps being made by the BBC and hence there were copies outwith the immediate grasp on the US government. Wow.

4. They hid all conclusive photgraphs of the concrete core during both construction and collapse, leaving only a grany image of a "spire". They then whisked away the massive surviving sections of concrete core on site and somehow made sure everyone saw lots of steel beams. Neat.

5. They've got every engineer and architect in the world, except that guy Pegelow, so scared of their job - or criminally incompetent - that after 5-7 years of study each we all believe that it was (a) a steel core and (b) the collapse was consistent with our understanding of catastophic building failure. Cool.

Chris, if you're right, that's the most comprehensive consipracy ever. The power and control exercised by the US Government must be immense. Clearly it can never be resisted. Might as well leave the front doors open and wait for the round-ups to begin......

Hey Chris....you missed this one! Reply, eh? Give us a laugh.

 

[Architect]

Here in California, the very western part of the US of A,

So, the man so smart that he's the only person in the whole wide world to expose the concrete core plot is saddly unaware that Alaska and Hawaii are both further west than California.

Hmm. Intellectual rigour or what.......

 

[Architect]

Eagers first analysis actually left out the floor beams, you know the one with the animations, and he was challenged by the steel workers immediately. Then laughed out of the 9-11 explanation world alltogether. His pancake theory belongs under the hammer theory.

Intellectual garbage

You'll have no problem providing a link to that?

 

[Architect]

That is slander, and slander is a crime. Are you a criminal?

It's libel, actually.

Hey Chris, come over here and say it in the UK where you can have your arse sued for saying such a thing. If you have the guts.

 

[bonavada]

They appear quite a bit smaller as those in the distance on the perimeter appear about the same size but are perhaps 3 times the distance away. Still, if they were the same, why do they not stand as does the interior box column or the "spire" and why are none seen inside the core area within the interior box columns standing. Or protruding from the intact core of the WTC 2 .

pure waffle and conjecture.

chris, again it must be pointed out to you the old adage that "absence of evidence is not evidence"
the collapse of the towers was a catastrophic, chaotic, unbelievably complex event lasting perhaps 30 seconds combined.

you irrationally judge definite structural elements of the towers from one or two cherry-picked, highly pixellated, obscured and distant images.

hundreds of other pictures that have accumulated over the years from many independent sources tell a story entirely opposing your concrete core. there is only one conclusion any person with a modicum of intelligence could come to and that is that is that YOU ARE WRONG!

these columns are not "elevator guide rails" chris.
those guys there are walking and working on a solid floor.
there is no way i can see that a concrete core could be poured under these circumstances...............

not only was your intial concrete core fantasy incorrect chris but you have woven a web of convoluted cynical fallacy around it. you have shamelessly lied about the PBS documentary, the mohawks, the magazine article etc etc. you even brought your poor long-suffering wife into it at one stage FFS. you have also demeaned the testement of brave people like mike pecararo, accused honest posters here of faking their credentials.......the list goes on......the worst though is when you have accused people of supporting the murder of "3000 americans"
it's time you packed up and left this thread to the tumbleweed. the only credit you could gain now is if you did so.
please listen mate, you're not doing yourself any good here.
leave now with a bit of dignity.

BV

 

[Big Al]

For someone who claims to know so much about building construction, I think you should know that they're NOT called "H" beams.

"I-beam of Jeannie with the light brown hair..."

 

[hcmom]

"I-beam of Jeannie with the light brown hair..."

If you beam her, won't it get her hair all bloody?

 

[tsig]

If you beam her, won't it get her hair all bloody?

It was ment as a metaphor floating on the air.

 

[NobbyNobbs]

Okay, I have no problem with that. Photographs are basically equal to raw data but considered to be different. Both admissable as evidence.



THIS is not a collapse.

I'm glad you have at least admitted to this. Yes, photographs can be evidence. No, they are not "raw evidence". Will you now stop referring to them as such? Thanks.

You fellows are not reading my web site.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html#anchor1232703

The first sentence.

The floor delays would be on one circuit and the core on another.

There were 2 totally separate explosive systems. The floors and the core. The floors were detonated first because the detonation system for the core was inside the core area. Detonating the core first would destroy the floor detonation circuits whereas the thick core walls protected the C4 cast inside themas well as the initiation circuits inside.

In the image of WTC 2 core, the floors have already been detonated and there is a slightly longer delay it seems for the lower section of core to initiate.

I speculate the thicker lower core walls were set with detonators in the first few weeks of the lease. There were reports of long delays at elevators due to maintenace on the elevators required by insurance. Workers had to take elevators over theri floors and return downward on another elevator.

The detonation system that sits for 3 months is NOT going to be electric caps. They can be detonated by radio waves. There is a gas flame system that uses a cap similar to an old fuse cap which is very stable but has a somewhat unpredictable delay on the distributon of intiation.

Two days before 9-11 there was a powerdown wherein electric caps were set probably on most of the floors which had a minimal dealy of 75 milliseconds and so had to be the precision electrical caps and digital delay counters..

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html#anchor1212053

Two detonation systems? For the love of Bob, why? Wouldn't exploding the core be sufficient to bring down the building? And if it isn't, why put explosives there in the first place?

If I watched the concrete core being constructed for an hour on TV in 1990 while the narattor described it. Should I think it is illogical to say there was a concrete core now because you believe the official story?

This documentary keeps getting better and better. So now, the documentary spent an entire hour showing you the construction of the core? I've got to get a copy of this....

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

The floor delays would be on one circuit and the core on another.

There were 2 totally separate explosive systems. The floors and the core. The floors were detonated first because the detonation system for the core was inside the core area. Detonating the core first would destroy the floor detonation circuits whereas the thick core walls protected the C4 cast inside themas well as the initiation circuits inside.

This is non-sensical. Wouldn't blowing the core would be sufficient to collapse a building? What is your evidence that there were 2 separate detonation systems? None of your photos show explosions away from the core. There is just one big plume of smoke and debris encompassing entire floors.

In the image of WTC 2 core, the floors have already been detonated and there is a slightly longer delay it seems for the lower section of core to initiate.

"it seems"??? Or maybe it's just that your hypothesis is incorrect. The "slightly longer delay" apparently was 5-15 seconds (the bulk of the building has collapsed to the ground and the debris cloud has spread out at least a block).

I speculate the thicker lower core walls were set with detonators in the first few weeks of the lease. There were reports of long delays at elevators due to maintenace on the elevators required by insurance. Workers had to take elevators over theri floors and return downward on another elevator.

What lease? And when were the detonators in the floors set?

Two days before 9-11 there was a powerdown wherein electric caps were set probably on most of the floors which had a minimal dealy of 75 milliseconds and so had to be the precision electrical caps and digital delay counters..

The powerdown, if there actually was one, only affected 1 floor of 1 building. That doesn't explain the other buildings.

 

[Big Les]

If I watched the concrete core being constructed for an hour on TV in 1990 while the narattor described it. Should I think it is illogical to say there was a concrete core now because you believe the official story?

You should certainly question whether what you remember seeing was what you actually saw. For the purposes of this thread, you need to show us stills or video from this mythical video, or your memories are useless to your argument.

Consider, the official act also includes destruction of evidence and blocking investigations, and the construction bluprints have never been made available to anyone.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/blueprints.html

I suggest you rethink what logic is to you?

Right back atcha chief; got any evidence for this withholding of evidence and/or obstruction? Even if blueprints and other material is being with-held, that does not logically prove a conspiracy.

 

[Christophera]

Farseitect Prove He Is A Fraud

1. Have a look at what it's welded to on the "inner" end

You will have to be more specific.

2. For someone who claims to know so much about building construction, I think you should know that they're NOT called "H" beams.

When the flange is thicker than the web and the web width is about equal to the flange width. It is called an "H" beam.

You have just proven you are a fraud.

http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861616897/H-beam.html

H-beam (plural H-beams)
Definition:

H-shaped structural part: a structural steel member shaped like an H in section. It is similar to an I-beam.


http://www.answers.com/topic/h-beam

H beam (??ch ?b?m)
(civil engineering) A beam similar to the I beam but with longer flanges. Also known as wide-flange beam.


http://www.answers.com/topic/i-beam

I-beam

I-beam (?'b?m')
n.
A steel joist or girder with short flanges and a cross section formed like the letter I.


BTW, the wiki definition is not correct. Welded beams are welded, whatever shape they have

 

[Christophera]

You should certainly question whether what you remember seeing was what you actually saw. For the purposes of this thread, you need to show us stills or video from this mythical video, or your memories are useless to your argument.



Right back atcha chief; got any evidence for this withholding of evidence and/or obstruction? Even if blueprints and other material is being with-held, that does not logically prove a conspiracy.

I proved the witholding of documents once. Here I will do it again

http://www.nyclu.org/g_archive020602.html


Blocking investigations is common knowledge. Why are you here? Your only purpose appears to disinform.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/unexplained_911_explosion_at_wtc_complex.htm
Although the Customs House apparently exploded at 9:04 a.m., the government-sponsored investigation was steered away from looking into what had actually happened.


http://www.thepowerhour.com/911_analysis/wtc6-explosion.htm
The Federal Emergency Management Agency funded an investigation by the American Society of Civil Engineers. However, investigators were reportedly blocked from the building by an order from the New York City’s Department of Design and Construction .


http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Sept_11_2001/New_Pearl_Harbor.html
20. Evidence that the FBI and other federal agencies blocked investigations after the attacks that might have revealed the true perpetrators.

 

[Big Les]

Your questionable media sources notwithstanding, the withholding of evidence does not prove a conspiracy. Evidence is routinely withheld with respect to investigations (as I seem to remember somebody pointing out to you), and will no doubt see the light of day in due course.

How is it evidence of a conspiracy?

As to my other point, which you've conveniently ignored, why should anyone be expected to believe your concrete core on the basis that you saw it on a TV show that apparently no longer exists?

 

[Architect]

You will have to be more specific.



When the flange is thicker than the web and the web width is about equal to the flange width. It is called an "H" beam.

You have just proven you are a fraud.

http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861616897/H-beam.html

H-beam (plural H-beams)
Definition:

H-shaped structural part: a structural steel member shaped like an H in section. It is similar to an I-beam.


http://www.answers.com/topic/h-beam

H beam (??ch ?b?m)
(civil engineering) A beam similar to the I beam but with longer flanges. Also known as wide-flange beam.


http://www.answers.com/topic/i-beam

I-beam

I-beam (?'b?m')
n.
A steel joist or girder with short flanges and a cross section formed like the letter I.


BTW, the wiki definition is not correct. Welded beams are welded, whatever shape they have

Actually, you've just shown yourself to be a fraud. It's a Universal Column section.

 

[Architect]

Now you see what a great conspiracy this is:

1. They hypnotised the entire US population, except maybe Chris, and somehow all of us in other countries too. Whooooweee.

2. They made everyone forget, from construction workers to engineers, forget about all the concrete they poured. Including the magic C4 explsove coated rebar you can't prove existed. And removed all records. And blueprints. Impressive, eh? Thousands of people and tens of thousands of written records.

3. They magicked away a PBS documentary showing a concrete core, despite it perhaps being made by the BBC and hence there were copies outwith the immediate grasp on the US government. Wow.

4. They hid all conclusive photgraphs of the concrete core during both construction and collapse, leaving only a grany image of a "spire". They then whisked away the massive surviving sections of concrete core on site and somehow made sure everyone saw lots of steel beams. Neat.

5. They've got every engineer and architect in the world, except that guy Pegelow, so scared of their job - or criminally incompetent - that after 5-7 years of study each we all believe that it was (a) a steel core and (b) the collapse was consistent with our understanding of catastophic building failure. Cool.

Chris, if you're right, that's the most comprehensive consipracy ever. The power and control exercised by the US Government must be immense. Clearly it can never be resisted. Might as well leave the front doors open and wait for the round-ups to begin......

Still waiting for your reply, Chris

 

[Architect]

You'll have no problem providing a link to that?

Still waiting for this one tooooooooo

 

[Architect]

Ahem

Remind me again where the Inviscrete is in these photographs, Chris?

 

[bonavada]

Remind me again where the Inviscrete is in these photographs, Chris?

and remind me how it was poured here:-

ETA and here:-

ETA ooops and here:-



OMG there's more:-

BV

 

[Architect]

BV

Gotta love that second shot of yours; at least 8 floors of nothing but colums visible before perspective eclipses to facade-facade view.

Now there are two ways to look at this:

1. The concrete (haha) has still to be poured by the 3" rebar and shuttering are magically invisible.

2. We're looking at a steel columned building.



Oops, forgot no. 3 - it's part of the evil G'b'm'n't Conspiracy