• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Belz... said:
Chris reminds me of Appolo in Rocky IV...

Throw the damn towel, already.
Click to expand...

When one has evidence as good as this.


with much more good evidence here,

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

and also KNOWS FOR CERTAIN that the core was concrete, is there a reason to give up? I mean my childrens futures and the future of my nation depend on the truth, perhaps even the world.

Does the great god of fiends, Belz, advocate cowardice?
 
Christophera said:
When one has evidence as good as this.


with much more good evidence here,

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

and also KNOWS FOR CERTAIN that the core was concrete, is there a reason to give up? I mean my childrens futures and the future of my nation depend on the truth, perhaps even the world.

Does the great god of fiends, Belz, advocate cowardice?
Click to expand...

That still scares the crap out of me.
 
Derail

Architect.

I suspect that you are watching this thread, and I would like some information from you, if you can give it. It seems like a good use for a dead thread.

In the 1970's and 1980's I worked for TRADA, and sometimes had to give advice on fire related matters over the phone. Our experience (me and a couple of colleagues) was that architects that rang us very often had little knowledge of fire matters. So, my question is, have you any idea what sort of fire related instruction would have been given to the architects ringing us then, and what is it like today.

Thanks in advance
Dave

ps I probably won't see any reply tonight, as I'm off to a meeting of my Thursday Night Beer Drinkers Association
 
Aha, the heady days of the 1970s when I was at primary school........

Anyway, fire engineering is still covered but to be honest not in the same depth as structures or services. When I joined the civil service in 93 in order to work on post-Windsor fire plans for government sites, I got a stack of additional training in order to equip me with a better understanding.

Enjoy the beer club, you lucky sod.
 
Aha, the heady days of the 1970s when I was at primary school........

Anyway, fire engineering is still covered but to be honest not in the same depth as structures or services. When I joined the civil service in 93 in order to work on post-Windsor fire plans for government sites, I got a stack of additional training in order to equip me with a better understanding.

Enjoy the beer club, you lucky sod.
 
Garb said:
That still scares the crap out of me.
Click to expand...

Okay, I guess you've got a good reason for saying "no concrete".

But, do you not realize that saying there is concrete, actually says no more than that. Or are you unable to disregard the implications?
 
Just as a matter of interest Chris, how many kids have you got and what ages? Do you see them often?
 
Christophera said:
So then you have no use for the US Constitution, law or government that is lawful and you support the lie that murderers hide behind?
Click to expand...

Incidentally, the answer of the 40% of posters who are not American would automatically be "no" to this. We don't give a monkeys about US law or anything.
 
Architect said:
Just as a matter of interest Chris, how many kids have you got and what ages? Do you see them often?
Click to expand...

I have 2, I saw my son today, he's 20. We went for a hike. My daughters older and out of state.

Parents have a responsibility to stay in communication with each other and share understandings of the world their children live in. To allow corporate media to do this for us is very responsible and can lead to disasters such as the current political one that exists on a mass level.
 
It seems that mabe there are some people who are unwilling to let Chris have the last word.

If we all abandon this thread like some posters are advocating, Chris will no doubt be having the last word in this thread. (as meaningless as those last words will be) and no boubt he will be bumping his thread in order to goad us into responding to his nonsense that has been easily debunked and refuted countless times by practicaly everyone here.

Chris is the communal bike. Everybody's had a ride.

Everyone here knows how he resorts to repeating his debunked lies and fantasy as if it were new and not thouroghly addressed in previous posts.

Lord knows I've been guilty of letting Chris goad me into responding to his meaninless drivel time and time again. So I'm not trying to be high and mighty here. I admit to being a hypocrite in that respect. I admit that I've had my fun poking at the crazy guy, but it's time to move on.

The only way this thread is going to die and fade away is if we all make that new years resolution and not respond.
I'm even going to try and not even read this thread anymore. We've heard all of his stuff before over and over again. He's got nothing new!

Chris's lies and fantasy are way too self evident for any noob to be confused and a quick google or search will show them how wacky Chris's stuff is.
To date, I don't think there is anyone who has read and responded to this thread has ever been swayed by Chris.

Anyhoo, hopefully with any amount of self-control, This will be my last post in this wacked thread.

Hope you guys do the same.
 
uruk said:
It seems that mabe there are some people who are unwilling to let Chris have the last word.
Click to expand...

Since I have the only raw evidence of images from the demolition it is only fair and fitting that I continue to apply words of reason to define the evidence.

The only evidence presented by homer and otehrs is misinterpreted and I've logically proven it everytime they dare present it. For example, every denier has tried to pass off images of ELEVATOR GUIDE RAIL SUPPORT as core columns.

Unforunately for their argument they COMPLETELY fail to rationally come up with a reason for that vertical steel, they erroneously term "core columns" which would be SUPER strong, if they existed, to not be visible in any of teh demolition images. NO IMAGE OF THE TOWERS demise shows that vertical steel. That is because it is only vertical steel used to support elevator guide rails. If it were strong enough to be a core column it would be seen here.


And with the "interior box column" called the "spire" heavy steel columns that did exist and were strong enough to stand (if they weren't cut, and I explain how) but were outside the core area.

The supposed steel core columns are never seen, the vertical steel MISINTERPREATED by the deniers of the concrete core, is too strcuturally unsubstancial to stand on its own.

The concrete core has so much documentation that a medium sized web site is easily filled with it.

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

There is NO web site about the "steel core columns", how could there be, there is no evidence to build it with.
 
Christophera said:
What is odd is that you have not come up with a rational explanation for what this rounded top sihouette is of the WTC 2 core and still insist on providing interpretations of construction photos that prove nothing.
Click to expand...


Belz said:
Hint: concrete doesn't bend very well.
Click to expand...

Exactly why the Twin towers had the fastest elevators in the world. The alignment of the elevator guide rails was so consistent they could be run faster than most for heights that tall.

Exactly why the towers stood for 33 years. The high winds caused the sides of the towers to "fly" steel flexes way too much, so concrete had to be used.

Here is a bridge flying, then falling. Only 42 MPH wind.

http://video.google.com/videosearch...G=Google+Search&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv

Imagine how a vertically loaded tower would perform in a 110 MPH wind, which did happen a few times in the 33 years they stood.
 
Blue Mountain said:
Further, can you provide evidence as to how the literally thousands of people investigating the events of September 11 and the collapse of the WTC towers--the 9/11 Commission, FEMA, and NIST--all managed to miss something as completely obvious such as the materials used in their construction? Especially with access to things like people, plans, and blueprints?
Click to expand...


It is well known that FEMA nor anyone had access to the blueprints.

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

The ex NYC mayor took the WTC documents, put them in his wherehouse and will not return them. Courts will not compel a return.

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


It is clear that you are missing something as obvious as a massive coverup.
 
Christophera,

Where are you getting the information that the core used 3" diameter rebar on 4' centers?

My understanding is that the architect wanted to keep the core design light so he encased it with Sheetrock.

I worked for the Army Corp of Engineers some time ago and had the pleasure of working on-site at the Toole, Utah military site where they built a facility to incinerate nerve gas. The incineration part on the plant had 4' thick walls designed to hold up to an explosion. They used nowhere near 3" diameter rebar for the construction.

Where are you getting this information from and what documentary did you see about the construction process?
 
Gamolon said:
Christophera,

Where are you getting the information that the core used 3" diameter rebar on 4' centers?

My understanding is that the architect wanted to keep the core design light so he encased it with Sheetrock.

I worked for the Army Corp of Engineers some time ago and had the pleasure of working on-site at the Toole, Utah military site where they built a facility to incinerate nerve gas. The incineration part on the plant had 4' thick walls designed to hold up to an explosion. They used nowhere near 3" diameter rebar for the construction.

Where are you getting this information from and what documentary did you see about the construction process?
Click to expand...

Gamolon, I know you're new here but please don't be tempted to reason with Chris on this. This thread has been running since May 2006, all the evidence and reasoning has been presented several times. Chris has not changed his position even slightly and keeps posting the same image and links from his website.

There really is no point in debating Chris and his argument (based on his memory of a non-existent documentary) that the towers were pre-built with c4-coated rebar and then detonated 30 years later is too ridiculous to require further counter-argument.

Should you be tempted to argue for the sake of amusement or as an abstract exercise I would suggest that you give serious consideration to the idea that Chris has a mental illness. If this is the case, then arguing with him will not help his condition.

There is plenty of evidence to suggest that Chris is a deeply troubled man, here is just one section of one of his websites:

http://truthasaur.com/my_22/my22.html

The consensus of long-time posters on this thread is that it is better for it to be left to die.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom