• 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.
NobbyNobbs said:
I have read every page of this thread, Chris. Some unanswered questions:

1) Where was this posting posted? The one where Leslie agrees with you?
2) What was the name and approximate date of the magazine you referred to concerning the C-4 coated rebar?
3) How do you reconcile the fact that the closest thing we can find to the video you reference says that there were core columns rather than concrete?

None of these questions have been answered. I await eagerly.
Click to expand...

Christophera said:
Read the thread for answers to 1 & 3. 2 I'm not answering because you are a disinfo and the info will disappear if I do.
Click to expand...

Nobby

Quick, get Sergeant Colon and Captain Carrot of the disinfo squad onto this.

Now

Dave
 
Sorry for not posting much, but I knackered my knee falling down a temp. access tower inside the Beetham Tower on Friday and have only just got a wireless connection sorted out in the house in order that I can post from the old sickbed.

Chris has a number of clear problems with his argument:

1. No photographs of the concrete core during construction; given the size and scale of the buildings, it's simply untenable to suggest that they would never exist.

2. His missing (i.e. never existed) BBC and PBS documentary. Given that BBC documentaries tend to get wide coverage, for example in Oz or Canada, this too is quite untenable.

3. His quote from a book which doesn't exist, but even more damning his failure to recognise that this undermines his case.

4. A comprehensive failure to prove that there is or was such a thing as C4 coated reinforcement, which is quite incredible given the number of people involved in the construction of the tower.

5. The acceptance of the steel core and collapse failure mechanism by the worldwide engineering and architectural communities. Again this is dealt with by hand-waving, specifically a suggestion that all of us - even in countries opposed to the US - have been silenced.

6. A failure to address the structural issues around a steel or concrete core, notably some weird unsubstantiated arguments about "torsion",


Chris; troll, liar, and delusional eejit. I make more headway debating with my 5 year old.
 
Christophera said:
This is nonsense.
Click to expand...

No, it's not. Search the thread.

If what homer/gravey/idiot posted was that good of evidence someone would have made a "steel core column" site by now. It is all crap and whoever trys to build it will go down in history as the biggest pawn, disinfo to ever breath. They will have to compete with the fools that actually believe FEMA though.
Click to expand...

I'll make such a site after I finish my 'the earth is round' site. I've good evidence it is.

The FEMA core cannot disappear within what was seen. Cutting steel with out custom, built in <spam> cutting charges makes an absolutely HUGE sharp noise/bang throwing shrapnel for thousands of feet.
Click to expand...

Well, the core must not of been cut up during the collapse, then.

We did not see that or hear that. We saw nice <spam> big billowy well contained blasts.
Click to expand...

So now you are saying that blowing up hundreds of people is nice?
 
Christophera said:
The link to Robertsons original message is in this thread.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to slog through over 9,000 posts for something that you could easily repost.
More of your evading tactics.
You are debating dishonestly Chris. Repost the link
 
Apart from the hypnosis one, which other (ie non 911) conspiracy theories do you believe Chris?
 
Christophera said:
Well, ......... you definitely have no evidence.

The vertical steel seen in the core area is guide rail support steel.
Click to expand...
I've provided ample evidence. I've showed you pictures of elevator rail guides, diagrams of elevators from Otis elevator co. Showed you pictures of elevator installations, web sites and videos that show that core was steel.

I am not simply saying so I am showing you that the steel in the core area had no structural substance and fell to the bottom of the core immediately when debris fell into the core area. That is why NO VERTICAL STEEL PROTRUDES from the core of WTC 2.

Steel core columns would have been able to stand if they existed. Particuarly becuase they would have been inside whatever that superstrong structure is which is obviously not destroyed so whatever was inside them, if it was anywhere near as strong would be protected and still standing.
Click to expand...
That's rediculous. that has nothing to do to proving that the core columns were elevator rail guides. Less than 1% of the "massive box columns" remained standing in one of towers, None remained standing in the other. Your argument is meaningless.
 
Dave_46 said:
(I went to the same school as Terry Pratchett, acouple of years ahead of him)
Click to expand...

I went to the same school as Kirsty Wark, which isn't the one she says she went to, for what it's worth.......but I'd rather have gone to school with Terry. Less shrill on the ear drums, I would imagine. :D
 
Christophera said:
Just time.

You have fulll access to every page in this thread. Robertsons message was originally posted at forum.physorg.com in a major disinfo thread there that I busted up.
Click to expand...

The message being posted on April 1st and that it cannot be verified beyond the posting at forum.physorg.com strongly suggests that someone was obviously making an April Fools joke on you Chris.
 
Christophera said:
Steel bends before it breaks. Tempered steel will snap if the bend is sharp enough. Absent high explosive cutting charges, there is no way the 47 1300 foot steel columns would be visually non existent. Some might snap but most would bend when the outer floors had fallen away to be seen toppled laying over the still existing strcuture below or bent then snapped but still protruding.

That all are always snapped and missing is simply not credible.
Click to expand...

Why not? With that much mass falling that quickly, the stress on the columns would have been enormous. What is your justification for claiming that all the columns could not have broken? We know that there were steel columns, the ones that you call "interior box columns" but seem to believe were in themselves not the core. Were these removed before 9/11? If not, they must have broken into small pieces right?

In this image the spire comprised of an interior box column, it only stands because cutting charges failed at that elevation.
Click to expand...

Evidence for this? Can you point out where the "cutting charges" are visible on this column?
 
Last edited:
Christophera said:
What makes you think I keep that link around? It is here in this thread or do a google on it at the site it was originally posted.

I had not even kept a copy of it when I though to post it here and had to go find it at that site I mentioned a few posts back where Robertson originally made it.
Click to expand...

You don't keep it around? An important piece of evidence like that? Your not sounding very rational. I think this is a clear indication of your dishonesty. What infintesmal credibility you had here is completely gone.
 
Christophera said:
This is nonsense.

If what homer/gravey/idiot posted was that good of evidence someone would have made a "steel core column" site by now.
Click to expand...
Wow! Thanks for putting me in the same company as Gravey. There are hundreds of sites, diagrams, videos and reports that mention the steel core. Why would there need to be one completely dedicated to the steel core. And even if there was one, you would call it a gov't disinfo site. Your being silly.

It is all crap and whoever trys to build it will go down in history as the biggest pawn, disinfo to ever breath. They will have to compete with the fools that actually believe FEMA though.

The FEMA core cannot disappear within what was seen. Cutting steel with out custom, built in cutting charges makes an absolutely HUGE sharp noise/bang throwing shrapnel for thousands of feet.

We did not see that or hear that. We saw nice big billowy well contained blasts.
Click to expand...
Says the guy who ingnores facts, makes up lies, and believes April Fools jokes.
 
Oh. And you still haven't shown me a picture showing Tony Jebson's concrete core being built ahead of the steel.
 
Bell said:
No, it's not. Search the thread.
Click to expand...

http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=3108&st=9390

Perhaps you do not know how to search.

Bell said:
Well, the core must not of been cut up during the collapse, then.
Click to expand...

Or, ......... the steel core columns did not exist, then they do not have to get cut up.

One thig is D@mm sure, 47, 1300 foot steel columns are never seen in ANY of the demo images. Only interior box columns. The elevator guide rail suppport steel is so flimsy it fell to the bottom of the core immediately.

Bell said:
So now you are saying that blowing up hundreds of people is nice?
Click to expand...

No. you are trying to say that is what I am saying.

I am saying these nice billowy debris cloudes/waves can only be created by optimally contained, uniformly distributed high explosives. Doing so respects the truth of those innocent peoples lives and endeavors to use the truth to protect more lives.

By arguing against the obvious truth of an explosion rather than the total fallacy of collapse you are saying "it is nice that the perpetrators get away with murdering 3000 innocent people." and "I'm too afraid to recognize the truth so I'm just going to sit here and type to say NO, without regrad for whatever evidence is produced for a concrete core or high explosives."

But that is all unconscious for you, which you will not be able to admit either. So please, hurry up and post in more denial so I can be correct.
 
TellyKNeasuss said:
On the other hand, citing a book that doesn't actually exist is hilarious.

What network was that 1990 documentary broadcast on?
Click to expand...

Not being able to find record of it does not mean it does not exist. That goes for the documentary as well. Our society is really messed up.

The documentary "The Construction of the Twin Towers" was broadcast on PBS, channel 28 in Southern California.
 
Christophera said:
Not being able to find record of it does not mean it does not exist. That goes for the documentary as well. Our society is really messed up.

The documentary "The Construction of the Twin Towers" was broadcast on PBS, channel 28 in Southern California.
Click to expand...

They issued a retraction on the concrete core. You will never find it; only expert researchers will.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom