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

[tsig]

Considering that I would not expect any sane person to participate in the construction of an office building with built-in explosives, I'm afraid that question is a little too hypothetical for me to answer.



Well, hypothetically, if I were insane enough to come up with this explosive-coated rebar plan, I'd probably also have to be insane to think that security clearances would keep everyone from spilling the beans. So I suppose it all makes sense... in an insane sorta way.



Well, that's kinda why I asked, because I think I have a basic understanding of what happened to that long, thin, flat Tacama Narrows Bridge, and I just can't picture anything remotely similar happening with a tall, square office building. The towers were designed to withstand the huge lateral loads produced by wind, yes, but that would produce bending, not torsion. That bending was resisted by the exterior column "tube," not the core, and it seems to me any torsion produced by wind would be pretty danged negligable in a design that could withstand that bending, without any help from the core. Everything I've read says the core was designed to just carry vertical loads, and I can't think of any reason why that's not the case.

It's well known that a security clearance renders you immune to exposives.

 

[Christophera]

Wow. That was incredibly weak Chris.
Look closer at the pictures. The frames holding the cranes are clearly visible in the outer corners of the core area. The cross connections are clearly conecting the core columns. These pictures clearly show that you are wrong.
Be a man and admit to it.

I see no columns in the core. I see floor beams connecting the interior box columns.

The crane platform was seriously diagonaly braced, but not a part of the building.

Get a bigger picture and maybe we'll see more.

 

[Bell]

I see no columns in the core. I see floor beams connecting the interior box columns.

The crane platform was seriously diagonaly braced, but not a part of the building.

Get a bigger picture and maybe we'll see more.

ETA:

 

[Christophera]

Chris you cannot weld rebar coated with C4 becuse it burns and metal conducts heat.

Repeat, no welder in thier right mind would touch a rod to this rebar.

The documentary explained the "special plastic coating" had to be stripped and the margins shielded. That is all that was known until later when it was revealed to a welding contractor who was about ready to sue because he was told his welders would be able to do those welds then they were not allowed. He was paying out big $ to keep them in town while they were layed off so they would be there for the next level of interior box column butt welds after the core was cast up another 40 feet.

As far as "right mind".

Examine America for the last 40 years paying for the "mutually assured destruction policy" of the cold war.

The C4 coated rebar in the sub bases and missile silos was a part of that, so the technology, and the welders were all well developed.

 

[Christophera]

[qimg]http://hereisnewyork.org//jpegs/photos/3448.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://images.wisconsinhistory.org/whi_images_new/700099990250/9999004225-l.jpg[/qimg]

ETA:

[qimg]http://www.xs4all.nl/~davidbos/wtc_construction/wtc1_core.jpg[/qimg]

I see no "MASSIVE BOX COLUMNS" in the core area. I see them surrounding the core area and I only see floor beams connecting them. No diagonal bracing on the interio box columns except for the moment frames which are not shown in that image.

The vertical steel sticking up out of the core is WAY TOO SMALL and does not compare in any way to the interior box columns. It is elevator guide rail support steel.

 

[Bell]

I see no "MASSIVE BOX COLUMNS" in the core area. I see them surrounding the core area and I only see floor beams connecting them. No diagonal bracing on the interio box columns except for the moment frames which are not shown in that image.

The vertical steel sticking up out of the core is WAY TOO SMALL and does not compare in any way to the interior box columns. It is elevator guide rail support steel.

There is CLEARLY diagonal bracing in those three pictures. That is what you asked for. Diagonal bracing. Stop with the lie, you make baby Jezus cry.

Also, care to answer my two other posts?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2145385&postcount=8839
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2152796&postcount=9078

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

I see no columns in the core. I see floor beams connecting the interior box columns.

Can someone explain this to me?

 

[bonavada]

I see no columns in the core. I see floor beams connecting the interior box columns.

Can someone explain this to me?

it's a bit like the one below.......

I interviewed a Mohawk who was 24 when the towers were built. He couldn't say he remembered the concrete core. But he did remember they could only go 7 floors over the core with steel.

praps chris and the mohawk smokeum too muchum peace-pipe?

BV

 

[Bell]

Don't take too long now Chris, making up an explanation, which you will claim you saw in your non-excisting PBS documentary.

 

[uruk]

I see no "MASSIVE BOX COLUMNS" in the core area. I see them surrounding the core area and I only see floor beams connecting them. No diagonal bracing on the interio box columns except for the moment frames which are not shown in that image.

The vertical steel sticking up out of the core is WAY TOO SMALL and does not compare in any way to the interior box columns. It is elevator guide rail support steel.

You really are being obtuse on purpose. Your lying is clearly evident and shameful. The pictures clearly show the cross bracing of the columns. The crane support is clearly visible and separate from the columns.

At this point we are not talking about the interior core columns, this was in respons to you saying that there was no beams cross connecting the coulmns. The photos prove you wrong. Face it like a man.

 

[Bell]

it's a bit like the one below.......



praps chris and the mohawk smokeum too muchum peace-pipe?

BV

Or like saying the towers collapsed symmetrical AND the buildings fell to the wrong side?

 

[bonavada]

There is CLEARLY diagonal bracing in those three pictures. That is what you asked for. Diagonal bracing. Stop with the lie, you make baby Jezus cry.

Also, care to answer my two other posts?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2145385&postcount=8839
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2152796&postcount=9078

and mine?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2153777#post2153777

BV

 

[Canadian Malcontent]

We had a guy in our toronto jail ( wouldnt say who he really was, didnt want to go back to the states) who called 911 a few weeks in advance, He called plane attacks on Chicago and New York and said that the order was to stop them but to let one go through. I am gonna look for the newspaper article now.

www.rense.com/general20/vree.htm

 

[uruk]

Hey Chris!
You still are ignoring this!
Why wont you respond to it? Could it be because it shows you to be wrong about something? Does it put a kink in the armour of your self confidence?

Come on big guy, be a man own up to it.

Originaly posted by Christophera:
"Tony Jebson" <jebbo@texas.net> wrote:

>......Apparently, the WTC towers had no internal
>structural columns but relied on the exterior structure for
>support / strength. No doubt the impact of an airplane does
>this no end of harm.
I worked in downtown NY in the late 1960's when the towers were
built! At lunch time we went to the construction site to watch the
progress. And we saw them first buildt an internal thick walled
rectangular concrete core inside which later the elevators ran. The
steel work was erected around this core several floors behind!

-=tom=-

Seems like "Tony Jebson" is a liar or seriously mistaken.

Where is the concrete core several floors ahead of the steel work in these pictures?

Come on Chris If Tony Jebson is right there should be a concrete tube soring abouve the steel . Where is it?

 

[JimBenArm]

OK, I really need to say this:
I served in the Navy on 4 submarines, three sub tenders, and three submarine squadrons in the height of the cold war. (USS Pollack SSN-603, USS Guardfish SSN-612, USS George Washington SSBN-598, USS Pogy SSN-647, USS Sperry AS-12, USS Dixon AS-37, USS McKee AS-41, Submarine Squadron 3, Submarine Squadron 2, SubGroup 5, if you're interested, or even if you're not). I never heard anything about C-4 coated REBAR or any other such nonsense. This claim is total BS, and anyone who says it is a bald-faced liar. No such thing exists or ever has existed. PERIOD, end of discussion!

Don't care what you saw in a PBS documentary, I was there, been there, done that, have the T-shirt to prove it.

 

[uruk]

It is elevator guide rail support steel.

Prove it.

 

[Christophera]

Consider, would you allow somebody to weld your explosive coated rebar in your tower based on an absolute "do it this way" with out telling them exactly why when you had somebody to tell that had passed a series of security tests over years.

Considering that I would not expect any sane person to participate in the construction of an office building with built-in explosives, I'm afraid that question is a little too hypothetical for me to answer.

I hear what you are saying and it makes sense. A few posts back I commented on the "mutually assured destruction policy" that America has participated in for about 40 years. Everyone I've ever talked to has considered that insane. Our tax dollars paid for hundreds of thousands of nukes and the Twin Towers. Recall, the people of New York voted the towers down several times. They were built despite this public rejection. The things our government has been doing just don't make sense. That we pay for it makes less sense. That is our problem. Media has seriously twisted our perception of what life is about and this has damages our society so badly it almost bears no resemblance to our fathers or grandfathers society. Consider Iran Contra. The savings and loan rip off, BCCI, enron. We've been so divided we cannot even object to these things that show us being ripped off and our intelligence agencies moving drugs in into our country and taking part in international /weapons/drug trading.We know that things are VERY wrong and tear ourselves away from our petty fears, wants and desires long enough or well enough to consider our needs, the needs of future generations. Corrupted by comfort, lies and manipulations.

I believe they were told. and that a security clearance basically makes a person unable to expose the facts.

Well, hypothetically, if I were insane enough to come up with this explosive-coated rebar plan, I'd probably also have to be insane to think that security clearances would keep everyone from spilling the beans. So I suppose it all makes sense... in an insane sorta way.

The paragraph I wrote above expands on your logic that expresses " in an insane sorta way' and shows how WE HAVE BEEN allowing it, taking part in it and PAYING for it.

Wind Roger. Wind. Did you see the Tacoma narrows bridge video?http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8849554834285920420&q=tacoma+narrows+bridge&hl=enThat was from a 42 mile an hour wind. The towers were expected to see over 100 MPH winds from occasional hurricanes.The tower faces begin to fly and twist the tower.

Well, that's kinda why I asked, because I think I have a basic understanding of what happened to that long, thin, flat Tacama Narrows Bridge, and I just can't picture anything remotely similar happening with a tall, square office building. The towers were designed to withstand the huge lateral loads produced by wind, yes, but that would produce bending, not torsion. That bending was resisted by the exterior column "tube," not the core, and it seems to me any torsion produced by wind would be pretty danged negligable in a design that could withstand that bending, without any help from the core. Everything I've read says the core was designed to just carry vertical loads, and I can't think of any reason why that's not the case.

I've got to say thank you for your comment there. You are truly a common sense individual with respect for reason. I've been trying to get "Architect" to answer the question you just partially answered regarding the cores ability to resist torsion.There was torsion caused by the wind, and bending as you say. The moment frames and the perimeter wall did mostly take care of bending, as you say. Your point made, which I've been trying to get "Architect" to acknowledge for pehaps 30 pages now, is that a set of columns inside of a core area approximatly 1/2 the dimensions of an outside set of square walls, would add no resistance to torsion.

In the 1990 documentary I viewed called "The Construction of the Twin Towers", the first 30 minutes was devoted to the design process. Yamasaki took Robertsons original core column design and built a model to scale and loaded then subjected it to wind tunnel tests. He found that the towers resistence to bending was acceptable, but, with loads applied, the very tall proportions and winds over 65 miles per hour showed deflections of the perimeter walls that indicated failures would probably occur over 75 MPH of wind. 110 MPH winds in hurricane were normal at times and the spec.'s bascially called for resistence to 120 MPH. Yamasaki abandoned the steel core columns and utilized the steel reinforced cast concrete core as it handed lateral displacements better and dealt very well with the torsion issue.

Please, examine the page I've put together that shows silhouettes of the towers using what I know from the documentary to explain the images,Understanding Silhouetted Images Of The Towers,

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11corexplosions.html

It begins with the 3rd image down. WTC 1 was almost unrentable because of the poor access across the core. One hallway in opposite directions perpindicuarly every other floor. It actually was about 30% empty up till 2001 as far as I can tell. Mostly government offices because the gov. employees HAD to tolerate the poor access. After WTC 1 reached it's max height, construction was basically stopped on WTC 1 to start WTC 2 which had a redesigned core having 2 hallways in each direction which could be rented immediately.

Also, please examine the issues I've pointed out with the expanding planes of debris and the vertical valley formed between them down low on the page. Common sense stuff.

 

[Bell]

OK, I really need to say this:
I served in the Navy on 4 submarines, three sub tenders, and three submarine squadrons in the height of the cold war. (USS Pollack SSN-603, USS Guardfish SSN-612, USS George Washington SSBN-598, USS Pogy SSN-647, USS Sperry AS-12, USS Dixon AS-37, USS McKee AS-41, Submarine Squadron 3, Submarine Squadron 2, SubGroup 5, if you're interested, or even if you're not). I never heard anything about C-4 coated REBAR or any other such nonsense. This claim is total BS, and anyone who says it is a bald-faced liar. No such thing exists or ever has existed. PERIOD, end of discussion!

Don't care what you saw in a PBS documentary, I was there, been there, done that, have the T-shirt to prove it.

Hello JimBenArm, welcome to this... ehm... ehm... well, welcome anyway. The PBS documentary does not excist, and anyhow, it did not address the C4. That is something Chris made up, after he made up the documentary.

You see how this works? We demand evidence, he says it was in the documentary (or not, but must be a logical conclusion - in his foggy eyes).

 

[Christophera]

You really are being obtuse on purpose. Your lying is clearly evident and shameful. The pictures clearly show the cross bracing of the columns. The crane support is clearly visible and separate from the columns.

At this point we are not talking about the interior core columns, this was in respons to you saying that there was no beams cross connecting the coulmns. The photos prove you wrong. Face it like a man.

The cross supports you indicate are a part of the crane platform. The crane towers could be independantly moved around, up and down, inside the platform.

Note, the diagonal braces you arrow in green ARE INSIDE the interior box columns. And, are never seen in the demo images.

 

[Christophera]

You really are being obtuse on purpose. Your lying is clearly evident and shameful. The pictures clearly show the cross bracing of the columns. The crane support is clearly visible and separate from the columns.

At this point we are not talking about the interior core columns, this was in respons to you saying that there was no beams cross connecting the coulmns. The photos prove you wrong. Face it like a man.

Prove it.

http://images.wisconsinhistory.org/whi_images_new/700099990250/9999004225-l.jpg

Elevator guide rail support steel.

It was weak, insubstancial structure that was whisked away by heavy steel and concrete crashing down the concrete core leaving the steel reinforced cast concrete tube standing.

PROOF, no core columns protruding from the core area

You face it like a man. There is no raw evidence from the demo supporting the existence of steel creo columns inside the core area.