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

[Mancman]

AND, I show the concrete goes all the way to the top with the image of the core of the top of tower 2 falling onto WTC 3.

Explain this image. Are those interior box columns with the dust from the detonated core trailing behind?

 

[bonavada]

chris...............

i believe the image you assert shows "high explosive shear" cut steel may simply show only salvage cuts made at ground zero. i believe this because the image i countered with shows remarkably similar cuts on salvaged WTC steel.

can you please show an image of steel cut by high explosives showing similar "high explosive shear" cuts from an actual controlled demolition other than the WTC 9/11 event? please corroborate any such image with a link to the source.

if you present such an image i will have to reconsider my opening argument.

BV

 

[Architect]

chris...............

i believe the image you assert shows "high explosive shear" cut steel may simply show only salvage cuts made at ground zero. i believe this because the image i countered with shows remarkably similar cuts on salvaged WTC steel.

can you please show an image of steel cut by high explosives showing similar "high explosive shear" cuts from an actual controlled demolition other than the WTC 9/11 event? please corroborate any such image with a link to the source.

if you present such an image i will have to reconsider my opening argument.

BV

That's a very fair point, Chris; I for one have never seen thermite/ate cut steel and would like to see an example in order that we can compare it to your photgraphs.

 

[JonnyFive]

Little jonny must learn to read at some point mom. We can't indulge him forever you know. It is in his own best interest that he learn to apply himself.

Stay late and study this Jonny

Those insults have all the maturity of a grade school cafeteria food fight, and I think you are sorely mistaken if you believe that they hurt me. As poignant as your rhetorical abilities are, I think you might profit more from addressing the concerns of those here, rather than insulting us.

So, let's get back to the whole problem of you proving anything. For the sake of rhetoric, I will grant you your ridiculous concrete core with whatever god-awful rebar you claim it has.

Now: prove to me that the government blew it up. You have yet to establish anything else, even with blurry images. Even if we give you the benefit of the doubt (which I think you seriously abuse) and say your images show a core, how are we to know that there were explosives that were detonated by the US government?

No, I've read your web site, Chris. You haven't proven anything. Your unwillingness to answer questions and eagerness to resort to childlike insults only reinforces my belief that you are hopelessly lost in your own make-believe world.

You're welcome to introduce new evidence at any time. You could start by actually reading the NIST reports on the collapse and refuting them in detail.

You don't need any pictures for that, your knowledge of science and engineering should be sufficient.

Which reminds me, you never did answer my question about that. Why?

 

[bonavada]

That's a very fair point, Chris; I for one have never seen thermite/ate cut steel and would like to see an example in order that we can compare it to your photgraphs.

if i remember correctly, chris' theory is that the columns were cut with shaped charges not thermite/ate. when and where these charges were laid and by what method they were detonated gawd knows, i don't think he's elaborated on that one.

what i'm interested in is whether such charges could make such a clean uniform cut in the steel he shows. the columns he refers to look almost as if they have just come from the mill.........

i've had a quick google but ATM can find no pics of steel after having been cut with high explosives. i do remember reading somewhere that steel columns were prepped (by mechanical cutting or perhaps oxy-a-torching) in buildings with a view to weakening the structure prior to controlled demolition with explosives. not being a CD expert or nowt i would like further information on this aspect of CD. i've got a day off today so may spend an hour or so taking a browse around, any suggestions anyone where would be a good place to look?

BV

 

[uruk]

What you mean is that you would LOVE to change the subject which is itself obsufucation. I made MY point more than adquately 10 pages back.

You have a peculiar habit of accusing others of the things you do yourself. I've been sticking with the same subject here. Your the one who has been desperately trying to avoid and change the subject. And you still haven't made any point except that you are avoiding to own up to some lies and errors.

The WTC 2 concrete core standing (and no one has ever reasonably shown it to be anything else) completely agrees with Jebsons usenet post no matter what he saw or could not see.​

So your still saying that you were wrong in post 5607.
Anyhoo the picture does not agree with Jebson's post. First there is no indication that the picture shows a concrete core since sheetrock and wall board can also have a rounded appearance and the dust and smoke is too thick to really see anything other than an amorphous shape. I showed you pictures of sheetrock still attached to the steel core columns.
Second, Jebson said he could see the concrete core during construction. And Jebson could have seen the concrete core from street level if there was a concrete core. The Comcast building pictures prove this.
You keep showing a picture of an indistinct blob and say that Jebson was right even though you said he was wrong in post 5607.

It is logical that he could not see the core which was 35 feet in from the edge of the floor minimum and 5 floors up. He could't know. We know from aerials that the core is not being built ahead of the exterior steel and the image above shows the core stripped of all floors as well as structural steel. NO CORE COLUMNS PROTRUDING FROM THE CORE AREA.

Wrong. The pictures of the Comcast building (taken at ground level) PROVE that Jebson could have seen the concrete core of the WTC1 tower if there had in fact been a concrete core in WTC 1.
The fact the aerial photos of the construction site show no concrete core being built ahead of the steel means that you are also wrong in post 8960.
And we've shown you many pictures of the core columns. You refusing to acknowledge the photos and reports just makes you look dishonest and, quite frankly, childish.

Trying to pretend that the fact of that image of the concrete core is not adequate is absurd. He talks about 4 floors of concrete and I show 40 floors of concrete. AND, I show the concrete goes all the way to the top with the image of the core of the top of tower 2 falling onto WTC 3.

The photo you keep posting does not clearly show anything. It just shows an indistinct shape that presumably is the core structure of the building.

This picture here: http://algoxy.com/psych/images/wtc2coreonto3.jpg Shows the spandrel sections falling onto the building below. I do not see any concrete in that photo. You going to have to point it out to me.

 

[uruk]

One picture is worth a thousand words. I saw many stills and film clips, all narrated. It could take 15 hours to write a description of what I watched in one hour.

How about "mega-secret coating"?

One picture may be worth a thousand words, But are those the correct words?

A mega-secret coating that had one hour of a PBS documentary devoted to it.

Super mega-secret indeed!

 

[uruk]

There was actually a few minutes where the tendency to call the "interior box columns" "core columns" was addressed and indentified.

It started with Robertsons original design which he (I do believe it was him) identifies in his April 1, 2006 post at physorg.com.

Christophera is correct in stating that the Twin Towers were constructed with a concrete core. Although in my original design the core was to be a steel framed one that decision was overridden by Minoru Yamasaki the architect.

That core should have resisted the airplane impacts AND the fires. I have said nothing for four and a half years but can remain silent no longer. My belief is that only explosives could have caused WTC 1 & WTC 2 to collapse the way they did on September 11, 2001.

Leslie E. Robertson
Director Leslie E. Robertson Associates, R.L.L.P. and lead engineer of the World Trade Center

I do not remember if Robertson was interviewed but I do remember that various employees were and that the tendency they had to refer to the "interior box columns" as core columns caused confusion which the videographers had to deal with and so included a reminder or notaton of it in the documentary specifically explaining that the columns that existed were not core columns or inside the core area but surrounded the core. They did not imply that this diminished their role, strength of size by ay means, they were indeed massive and there were many shots of them at various levels and phases of construction.

And the refrence to an April fools joke continues!
With made up stuff to boot!

 

[Belz...]

I know the core of the Twin Towers was a steel reinforced cast concrete tube. Why should I question sources that agree with raw evidence showing what can only be a steel reinforced cast concrete tube?

Why should you doubt sources that agree with you ? Well, if you don't know why, I guess you can never make an actual investigation.

Show me a concrete core in a construction photograph.

The images of the constrcution have been filtered and the few images of the concrete during constrcution are not available.

Speculation. Or can you provide a source for this assertion ?

Information is more controlled today than it ever has been in the past.

What the hell are you talking about ? Information is far more readily available today than it ever has been in the past.

supported/confirmed by raw images of the towers

"Raw" images, now ?

Are you listing your assigned disinformation tasks?

Are you accusing Arus of beign a government disinfo agent ? Wasn't she hypnotised ?

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.

So that hypnosis crap you pulled was just for show ?

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.

SUPERSTRONG!!!

That all [47 steel columns] are always snapped and missing is simply not credible.

You're forgetting that they were assembled, and that the joints are far weaker. Also, tens of floors fell upon them.

One thig is D@mm sure, 47, 1300 foot steel columns are never seen in ANY of the demo images.

Oh, yes they are.

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.

A win-win scenario, isn't it ?

 

[Belz...]

Emotional reasoning - Making decisions and arguments based on how you feel rather than objective reality. (See appeal to consequences.)

This, by the guy who says :

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."

 

[uruk]

IS THIS FOR REAL?????

I have heard Robertson saying that explosives were not used

Read the date of the Robertson posting. It was posted in Phys.org.forum on April 1st.
The post was obviously someone in the Phys.org forum playing an April Fools joke on Chris.

But he needs all the support he can get no matter how dodgy or questionable it is.
ALL of his evidence consists of blurry, misinterpreted pictures, mistaken accounts, a non-existant PBS documentary, an April Fools jokes, A Mohawk Indian who can't get his age right, a mistaken excerpt from a British publication that does not exist, and outright lie and invention.

 

[Architect]

ALL of his evidence consists of blurry, misinterpreted pictures, mistaken accounts, a non-existant PBS documentary, an April Fools jokes, A Mohawk Indian who can't get his age right, a mistaken excerpt from a British publication that does not exist, and outright lie and invention.

He'll think you're calling him tenacious and resourceful, you know.

 

[uruk]

He'll think you're calling him tenacious and resourceful, you know.

Yea, something tells me he would have been a better used car salesman than an unlicenced construction worker.

 

[firecoins]

9874 posts. Nothing relevant yet.

 

[JonnyFive]

Yea, something tells me he would have been a better used car salesman than an unlicenced construction worker.

I don't know, I don't really want a car with a concrete core.

ETA: 125 posts to go. I've got my hat ready. It's made of tin foil.

 

[Big Al]

I don't know, I don't really want a car with a concrete core.

Don't worry, Jonny. It has a steel core, really. But Chris just won't believe it.

 

[Big Al]

Read the date of the Robertson posting. It was posted in Phys.org.forum on April 1st.
The post was obviously someone in the Phys.org forum playing an April Fools joke on Chris.

Unless, of course, he posted it himself. Robertson daring to "come out of the closet" five years after the event (bit of a slow-acting conscience!) sounds as probable as most of Chris' other posts.

 

[JonnyFive]

Don't worry, Jonny. It has a steel core, really. But Chris just won't believe it.

As long as the gubmint didn't line it with explosives, then that's fine.

 

[bonavada]

ChristoPathos

found this here posted the other week.
is this sad or funny? can't quite make my mind up:-

.......I would take a 400 watt PA and a small generator to a local park next to where the local peace march assembles and I start talking about 9-11 and what I know about the towers. The peace marchers do not, at any time come to support my speaking or speak on their own even if I invite them to speak on whatever subject they wish. There was a time, before the war was over (sic), but it appears that the crisis management mentality of our society accepts official announcements of such deceptive nature and goes home.

In 2004 a coast guard member complained to the police that I was too loud. I was. I could be heard 2 blocks away. The police warned me and I turned the PA down to 1/2, they approved, and I kept talking. Then the coast guard member signed the complaint and I was cited for violating the noise ordinance. The police moved for dismissal at the hearing as the complainer, their witness did not show. The police were embarassed. I have only done it once since then.

You know I would be talking about the FEMA lie that the core was comprised of steel columns and that logically given the uniformity of the demolition or the resulting total pulverization of concrete that there was C4 coating the rebar encapsulated, sealed from the air and oxidization, preserving the RDX explosive circuits until initiated. I would be talking about the 2 hour 1990 PBS documentary I saw which identified the big slow down in the concrete core construction as being the "special, anti corrosion, vibration resistant" plastic coating on the rebar and the fact that it was flammable making it necessary for the municipal entity to require that only welders with a security clearance be allowed to execute the butt weld in the high tensile steel reinforcing bar used in the core shear walls. I would be sending the public to my website, http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html and asking them to communicate with me, to ask questions.

I would ask the public to inquire with friends and family for any who may have seen that documentary.

In the one time I spoke on 9-11 since being cited for violating the noise ordinance I observed a police officer at the moment I said "C4 coated rebar" raise his right hand, without looking at me, as he walked the sidewalk across the street from me, and shake his hand vigourously with his thumb pointed straight up.

Would you be speaking about demoliton with me or would would you be standing across the street? Would you be there at all?...............

BV

 

[Big Al]

I suspect the officer's real gesture was a vigorous tapping of his right temple with his extended index finger.