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

[Christophera]

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

You are way late with whatever your latest evasive compensation is trying to be.

The issue of torsion and the square tower shear wals is actually obvious to most people once they think about it.

How can an inner bunch of steel vertical elements begin to provide more resistence to twisting than 4 perimeter shear walls that are as dense as the 22 inch center to center spacing of the towers when the outer dimensions of the inner bunch of columns is around 1/2 the dimensions of the square walls????.

Particuarly when there is NO plan available showing how they are connected and braced. Notice NONE of BV's nor Farseitects images show any diagonal bracing of the supposed columns they attempt to evidence with misrepresented images.

Even Gene Corleys fake analysis fails to be seen in any images except for the one he misinterprets with imagery enhancing what is actually the inner wall of the outer steel framwork of the "tube in a tube" construction.

The wall formed by interior box columns annotated, "MASSIVE BOX COLUMNS" in the linked image. The rectangular framwork formed by interior box columns and floor beams is clearly seen.

There is no evidence from the demo images supporting the supposed "steel core columns" because they did not exist.

There is redundant support from the raw evidence of images from the demo for the concrete core.

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

There is redundant support from the raw evidence of images from the demo for the concrete core.

If there is, please post some of these images. You haven't posted a single image that is clear enough to show a concrete core.

If what you called '3" rebar' in 'THE REBAR' section of your web page really is only 3 inches wide, those men in the foreground must have toothpicks for legs.

What did you say the name of that 1990 PBS documentary was?

 

[delphi_ote]

And it stinks so bad the stones been choking
And weeping greenish drops
In the room where the giant fire puffer works
The torture never stops
The torture never stops
The torture
The torture
The torture never stops.

Don't mind me...

 

[Christophera]

If there is, please post some of these images. You haven't posted a single image that is clear enough to show a concrete core.

This IS the core of WTC 2. I know it is concrete. If you do not know as much as me you will not know what it is. If you think it is noy concrete explain what material you think it is.

Also, explain why none of the supposed 47, 1300 foot the steel core columns are not seen.

The image is clear enough. Stop evading.

 

[~enigma~]

This IS the core of WTC 2. I know it is concrete. If you do not know as much as me you will not know what it is. If you think it is noy concrete explain what material you think it is.

Also, explain why none of the supposed 47, 1300 foot the steel core columns are not seen.

The image is clear enough. Stop evading.

Christophera,

Do you care to explain why the 32 story building in Madrid (The Windsor building) is still standing AFTER a two day fire? What is the core of the Windsor building?

Either you are a really stubborn person or

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

This IS the core of WTC 2. I know it is concrete. If you do not know as much as me you will not know what it is. If you think it is noy concrete explain what material you think it is.

Also, explain why none of the supposed 47, 1300 foot the steel core columns are not seen.

The image is clear enough. Stop evading.

It's kind of brownish, so the core must have been made of mud.

I thought that you said you had lots of images. Why do you keep posting the same one?

 

[~enigma~]

Would you tell us what this is Christophera

 

[Christophera]

It's kind of brownish,

Yes it is concrete. Inside the perimeter walls is the concrete core of WTC 2. It is about to smash ALL THE WAY to the ground through WTC3.

so the core must have been made of mud.

Yes it is concrete and it is a steel reinforced concrete shear wall to left of interior box column, the "spire"

I thought that you said you had lots of images.

Yes it is concrete and here is one more image. This is the core wall at its base. the annotation of 3 inch rebar is not correct. Since annotation I have recalled that the foundations hat 6 inch bar that extended up for a distance into the shear wall base.

Why do you keep posting the same one?

Because you won't go to the web site and use the available information there.

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

Also, .......... the WTC 2 concrete core image cannot be explained by anything other than concrete reasonably. But if you do not know that, you do not know enough about the building materials involved here to evaluate what the images show.

 

[Christophera]

Would you tell us what this is Christophera
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_8790452c0ed9a19b0.jpg[/qimg]

That is an image of the framework of the interior box columns extended up ove rthe concret ecore being cast below. False floors are installed for the elevator guide rail installation crews to work on while guide rail support steel is lowered into position and aligned.

The elevator crews had priority, or, whatever would get the elevators up another few floors sooner was what the rest of the crews were working on. Every 80 feet or so, the concrete core HAD TO CATCH UP by the engineers specifications but until that point was reached the guide rail supports were installed and aligned and temporarily braced to the interior box columns.

After that the false floors were removed and the breakdown steel inner forms were set and outer form wood was placed against the inside of the interior box columns, (the building floors and perimeter columns would be in place by this time) and another 40 feet of concrete core was cast.

 

[~enigma~]

Christophera any reason you skipped over my post? Afraid of something. Do you live underneath a bridge?

 

[Christophera]

Christophera any reason you skipped over my post? Afraid of something. Do you live underneath a bridge?

You mean the Q about the madrid tower?

I know nothing of that tower. I only know about the Twin Towers.

 

[~enigma~]

That is an image of the framework of the interior box columns extended up ove rthe concret ecore being cast below. False floors are installed for the elevator guide rail installation crews to work on while guide rail support steel is lowered into position and aligned.

And I suppose you were there at the construction of the towers? I prefer to believe the documentation we have that the core of both towers was steel. I will believe the construction workers of the towers 9which one was my uncle) and mostly since I was often brought to the site and given a tour by my uncle and his foreman, I will believe my eyes instead of your BS lies.

 

[~enigma~]

You mean the Q about the madrid tower?

I know nothing of that tower. I only know about the Twin Towers.

You should read about it. In particular read about the core. Then it would be wise to rethink your concrete stupidity.

 

[Christophera]

You should read about it. In particular read about the core. Then it would be wise to rethink your concrete stupidity.

Why do you not just explain the stupidity you percieve as it relates to the other building without a concrete core.

 

[~enigma~]

Why do you not just explain the stupidity you percieve as it relates to the other building without a concrete core.

Windsor building had a concrete core and after a two day fire it remained standing. You claim the WTC collapsed after a fire that was much less than 48 hours although the core was concrete. Besides all the evidence you ignore that it was steel, testimony of people that were there, you instead want to base your belief on a documentary (mockumentary) that nobody besides you has seen. You are delusional.

 

[Arus808]

Windsor building had a concrete core and after a two day fire it remained standing. You claim the WTC collapsed after a fire that was much less than 48 hours although the core was concrete. Besides all the evidence you ignore that it was steel, testimony of people that were there, you instead want to base your belief on a documentary (mockumentary) that nobody besides you has seen. You are delusional.

you forget, chris claims that the concrete poured had a rebar reinforcement that was coated with plastic explosives.

forget the fact that such explosives wouldn't have any potency after 30 years...

 

[~enigma~]

you forget, chris claims that the concrete poured had a rebar reinforcement that was coated with plastic explosives.

forget the fact that such explosives wouldn't have any potency after 30 years...

Read the quote from Ethan Allen in my signature and you'll see what I think of Christophera and his ilk.

 

[Arus808]

nice quote. Same with my quote in my sig.

 

[Bell]

You mean the Q about the madrid tower?

I know nothing of that tower. I only know about the Twin Towers.

No, you dont.

Christopher, what the hell was the use for a concrete core anyway? The pictures posted by Uruk, Bonavada and others show the towers could stand without a concrete core. So why cast such as a core... 7 floors behind the rest of the building?

Eh?

 

[JonnyFive]

What did you say the name of that 1990 PBS documentary was?

Come on, Christophera, you must remember the name... the narrator... the production company... something?

Why doesn't it phase you when everyone here thinks your "concrete core" images are terrible proof. Why can't you easily flip out a great picture from the tower construction and show us all? Surely a massive concrete core wasn't simply hidden during construction.

ETA: Oh wait, are you claiming the core was actually poured below the floors that were at the top of the construction at any given time? Yet, they described it on the PBS documentary that no one but you can find. Could you please provide this documentary, as it is fast becoming the only possible avenue you have to claim we're all crazy and delluded and stupid because we don't see the truth of the core.