IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags 911 conspiracy theory , concrete core , free fall , world trade center , wtc core , wtc1 , wtc2

Closed Thread
Old 22nd June 2006, 05:19 PM   #1681
Apollyon
Muse
 
Apollyon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 942
Originally Posted by Christophera View Post
Can you recognize a bull if you see one? Can you see anything that small?

The core wall at base is inside the corner of the perimeter walls.

http://tinyurl.com/n849l
Can you not see your bogusness?

There are core columns here.
Apollyon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 05:20 PM   #1682
Apollyon
Muse
 
Apollyon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 942
Originally Posted by Christophera View Post
Whoa, collectively deceptive manuvers. Your red circle shows this structure.

http://tinyurl.com/etcyp

not the core wall at its base of WTC 2.

Shame on all of you.

Move the circle left 300 feet.
Core columns here.
Apollyon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 05:23 PM   #1683
Christophera
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,760
Originally Posted by Gravy View Post
Wrong again. Look at the first photo of the "core" in the dust. Look at the dust and debris cloud enveloping the buildings. Now look at your second photo.

How does it feel to be wrong EVERY SINGLE TIME?

Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory DID release their seismic records. Arthur Lerner-Lam there says you are completely wrong, about the "core" collapse, and about the explosives.
And the second photo shows the dust cloud expanded from the first, exactly as would be expected. Billowing at the bottom, lower at the the top of the dust.

Sure, photocopies of graphs were released by the USGS, that is all tho.

Last edited by Christophera; 22nd June 2006 at 05:30 PM.
Christophera is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 05:27 PM   #1684
Christophera
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,760
Originally Posted by Apollyon View Post
Core columns here.
I think the bogus qualities are clear.

Find the image link and post it in some form.
Christophera is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 05:30 PM   #1685
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
 
Gravy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 17,072
Originally Posted by Christophera View Post
And the second photo shows the dust cloud expanded, exactly as would be expected.

Sure, photocopies of graphs were released by the USGS, that is all tho.
I ask you again. In the first photo, what you claim to be a 600-foot concrete mass is standing. In the second, it isn't. There's video from a dozen angles. Show me video evidence of that collapse.

Stop whining and prove it, Christophera. Get the evidence.

That's right. The copies of the seismographs were released. And they show that there was no explosion, and no secondary collapse of a gigantic concrete tower.
Quote:
"There is no scientific basis for the conclusion that explosions brought down the towers. That representation of our work is categorically incorrect and not in context."
– Arthur Lerner-Lam, Lamont-Doherty seismic center, Palisades, New York.
Now, how about WHICH BUILDING you're talking about. Do you agree that you are wrong about claiming the close-up core photo shows WTC 2?
__________________
"Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard

What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links
Gravy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 05:30 PM   #1686
TheFeds
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 64
Originally Posted by Christophera View Post
And the second photo shows the dust cloud expanded from the first, exactly as would be expected.

Sure, photocopies of graphs were released by the USGS, that is all tho.
That is not all. This is not a photocopy. This is not a photocopy. By the way, don't try too hard to interpret the diagrams yourself. You're obviously not qualified, and you'll just data-mine them for another fallacy. Read the report, instead.

It took literally 30 seconds to find both of those with a search engine.

Last edited by TheFeds; 22nd June 2006 at 05:34 PM.
TheFeds is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 05:45 PM   #1687
Pardalis
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 25,817



Granted, by these pictures, there could have been some structure that kept standing a few seconds after the initial collapse. I think it actually denies your C4 theory, otherwise the "core" structure would have exploded as the collapse occured, right?

But we all know that the WTC was constituted by two things, an outer shell, made of steel beams, and a core, wether or not made of concrete.

Last edited by Pardalis; 22nd June 2006 at 05:49 PM.
Pardalis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 05:58 PM   #1688
Christophera
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,760
Originally Posted by Pardalis View Post
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...b38c9e9950.jpg
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...b38ca2ae5d.jpg

Granted, by these pictures, there could have been some structure that kept standing a few seconds after the initial collapse. I think it actually denies your C4 theory, otherwise the "core" structure would have exploded as the collapse occured, right?

But we all know that the WTC was constituted by two things, an outher shell, made of steel beams, and a core, wether or not concrete.
The towers were "tube in a tube" construction. The concrete core minimized the mineral weight of the towers while maximizing the load bearing capacity of steel. It's rectangular tube shape with high strength concrete and high tensile rebar was very good torsion resistence, actually one of the real threats to serious deformation and failure.

The Delays and Paths page exlains the sequence. The 43rd floor was very heavy and the transition between the base of the tower and the upper half. That is one reason why the core is seen momentarily. It also served to get the steel disconected and down, away from the concrete so that when the concrete detonated it wouldn't push steel into the surroundings.

At this point, the core stands after the thermite in the basement took out a number of stretches of perimeter columns while the lower floors detonated.

Also the detonation system in the lower portion would have to be different as the work required to set detonators in the core was much more than the upper floors because of the core wall thicknesses. The different system is a gas initiation that will not react to radio frequency transmission and can be left for months safely.
Work on the elevators in the beginning of the lease that kept people from getting to jobs on loer floors was publicized. Three days before 9-11 there was a power down in WTC 2 for 39 hours, documented. No security. The cable upgrade shut down for can be assumed generic to the entire WTC.

Last edited by Christophera; 22nd June 2006 at 06:00 PM.
Christophera is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 05:58 PM   #1689
Pardalis
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 25,817
In other words, Chris, why is the alledged "concrete core" still standing AFTER the collapse if it was imbeded with C4 explosives?
Pardalis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 06:02 PM   #1690
Christophera
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,760
Originally Posted by TheFeds View Post
That is not all. This is not a photocopy. This is not a photocopy. By the way, don't try too hard to interpret the diagrams yourself. You're obviously not qualified, and you'll just data-mine them for another fallacy. Read the report, instead.

It took literally 30 seconds to find both of those with a search engine.
Okay, you are right on that numerical data, same as that of the graph. However, the raw data of the digital file created by the seismometer is not available. People have tried to get it.
Christophera is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 06:02 PM   #1691
Pardalis
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 25,817
Originally Posted by Christophera View Post
The towers were "tube in a tube" construction.
Again, what does "tube" mean?


Quote:
It also served to get the steel disconected and down, away from the concrete so that when the concrete detonated it wouldn't push steel into the surroundings.
How considerate of them!

Quote:
At this point, the core stands after the thermite in the basement took out a number of stretches of perimeter columns while the lower floors detonated.
Of course you have no proof of any of that...

Quote:
Also the detonation system in the lower portion would have to be different as the work requires to set detonators in the core was much more than the upper floors because of the core wall thicknesses.
Where do you get that?

Quote:
Work on the elevators in the beginning of the lease that kept people from getting to jobs on loer floors was publicized. Three days before 9-11 there was a power down in WTC 2 for 39 hours, documented. No security. The cable upgrade shut down for can be assumed generic to the entire WTC.
Proof of a shut down in WTC1?
Pardalis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 06:06 PM   #1692
Apollyon
Muse
 
Apollyon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 942
Originally Posted by Christophera View Post
I think the bogus qualities are clear.

Find the image link and post it in some form.
I have.

Core columns here.
Apollyon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 06:15 PM   #1693
Hutch
A broken man on a Halifax pier, the last of Barrett's Privateers
 
Hutch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: About 7 Miles from the Saturn 5B
Posts: 6,785
OK, I was out of this thread, but catching up tonight I had a thought that might help out in concluding this neverending story (or at least rerouting it in a different way)

Now the WTC's, IIRC, were 208ft on each side, or a total of 43,264 square feet of area per floor.

If Chrisophera's 17' concrete cores are accurate, and if we figure the cores was about 60' on each side (total 240'-the 60 Ft. is an approximation, I do not believe Christophera has ever cited the dimensions for the core), the 240' x 17' equals 4,080 square feet, or nearly 10% of the total space for each floor.

Surely somewhere there are office diagrams and rental agreements that specifiy the square footage of the offices rented. if we subtract the known area occupied by the steel that we call the main support and Chris calls box columns, it should be possible to detemine if the remaining space would have accomodated that 4,000 square feet of concrete core.

Not sure where to loook and I start a vacation tomorrow, so I'm afraid I'm just an idea man--maybe not much of an idea, but it's the best I have at 8PM on a Thursday night...
__________________
No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. What? Look, somebody's got to have some damn perspective around here! Boom. Sooner or later. BOOM! -LT. Cmdr. Susan Ivanova, Babylon 5
Hutch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 06:17 PM   #1694
Pardalis
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 25,817
Christophera, where did you get all that information about the detonation sequence?

I want to see the litterature that you have read that lead you to conclude to that sequence of events.

Let me see for myself where you got that controlled demolition expertise.
Pardalis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 06:18 PM   #1695
Christophera
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,760
Originally Posted by Pardalis View Post
In other words, Chris, why is the alledged "concrete core" still standing AFTER the collapse if it was imbeded with C4 explosives?
The core stopped the detonation sequence that it had carried from above, the floors column cutters removed the outer steel tube inner supports, the interior box columns, while the thermite in the basement was initiating. This all started about the time the outer steel was down to the top of the concrete core here.

After most of the steel was near the gound, the core followed it.

Last edited by Christophera; 22nd June 2006 at 06:22 PM.
Christophera is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 06:23 PM   #1696
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
 
Gravy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 17,072
Originally Posted by Christophera View Post
Okay, you are right on that numerical data, same as that of the graph. However, the raw data of the digital file created by the seismometer is not available. People have tried to get it.
How about anecdotal reports, Christophera? Show me one that says that a 600 foot tower of thousands of tons of concrete came crashing down more than 10 seconds after the first collapse.

Show me the video evidence of that cataclysmic event.

Show me your evidence that the seismic reports are wrong.

Show me a photo of your mystery core.

Why are you posting here? Why don't you get some evidence to back your claims, or adjust your theories if you don't have evidence?

Why are you doing this? Don't you have a shred of self-respect? You didn't even know what BUILDING you were talking about all these years. Are you five years old?
__________________
"Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard

What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links
Gravy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 06:23 PM   #1697
Apollyon
Muse
 
Apollyon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 942
Originally Posted by Christophera View Post
The core stopped the detonation sequence that it had carried from above, the floors column cutters removed the outer steel tube inner supports, the interior box columns, while the thermite in the basement was initiating. This all started about the time the outer steel was down to the top of the concrete core here.
Except you can see the core columns.
Apollyon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 06:31 PM   #1698
Pardalis
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 25,817
Originally Posted by Christophera View Post
The core stopped the detonation sequence that it had carried from above, the floors column cutters removed the outer steel tube inner supports, the interior box columns, while the thermite in the basement was initiating. This all started about the time the outer steel was down to the top of the concrete core here.

After most of the steel was near the gound, the core followed it.
Could all this be possible without the use of explosives and the existence of a concrete core? Could some parts of the internal core of the tower have withstood the initial collapse for a few seconds then gave way? Could this be possible?
Pardalis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 06:41 PM   #1699
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,374
I have NEVER seen anybody so adept at closing his eyes and handwaving away evidence contrary to his opinion. It is truly amazing.

christophera, you are the quintessential rabid conspiracy theorist. A textbook case of blind ideology, you can wear the badge "woo woo" with pride, my man.

Rock on!
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 06:58 PM   #1700
Christophera
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,760
Originally Posted by Apollyon View Post
I have.

Core columns here.
On that page of images I see one of the tower tops during construction. Those columns ringing the core are the only heavy steel seen. Here is a zoomed image that is notated.

interior box columns
Christophera is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 07:03 PM   #1701
Christophera
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,760
Originally Posted by Gravy View Post
You didn't even know what BUILDING you were talking about all these years. Are you five years old?
I explained that I was not sure what tower the core wall at base image was from. It is the only image that has not been well identified. The images so far place it too far south to be of the north tower.
Christophera is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 07:13 PM   #1702
Christophera
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,760
Originally Posted by Gravy View Post
Show me the video evidence of that cataclysmic event.

Show me your evidence that the seismic reports are wrong.

Show me a photo of your mystery core.

Why are you posting here? Why don't you get some evidence to back your claims, or adjust your theories if you don't have evidence?
You cannot be serious. You with no evidence acuse me with 2 web sites having a great deal of evidence of having no evidence. And you are the same poeter who cannot come up with an alternative explanation for what must obviously be 3" REBAR ON 4' CENTERS. Exactly what i would expect, but not what you need to assert steel core columns because none are shown where you say they should be.
Christophera is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 07:15 PM   #1703
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
 
Gravy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 17,072
Originally Posted by Christophera View Post
You cannot be serious. You with no evidence acuse me with 2 web sites having a great deal of evidence of having no evidence. And you are the same poeter who cannot come up with an alternative explanation for what must obviously be 3" REBAR ON 4' CENTERS. Exactly what i would expect, but not what you need to assert steel core columns because none are shown where you say they should be.
Websites do not an argument make. You don't understand that you need evidence that supports your claims. You don't have any. Your websites and posts here are solid drivel. You've been shown to be wrong every single time. For that claim, I have abundant evidence.

Every single time, Christophera. You haven't been right once.

And you still think you're right. You're a very sad, delusional person. Please get help.


edit: grammar
__________________
"Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard

What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links

Last edited by Gravy; 22nd June 2006 at 07:21 PM.
Gravy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 07:20 PM   #1704
Christophera
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,760
Originally Posted by Pardalis View Post
Could all this be possible without the use of explosives and the existence of a concrete core? Could some parts of the internal core of the tower have withstood the initial collapse for a few seconds then gave way? Could this be possible?
That lower part of the core was so strong that even a demo had to wait a second to get the steel out of the way.

btw, In answer to your earlier question, I think I skipped answering, the outer tube is a steel framework and the inner is a concrete tube.
Christophera is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 07:20 PM   #1705
Apollyon
Muse
 
Apollyon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 942
Originally Posted by Christophera View Post
On that page of images I see one of the tower tops during construction. Those columns ringing the core are the only heavy steel seen. Here is a zoomed image that is notated.

interior box columns
Nope. Core columns.
Apollyon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 07:25 PM   #1706
Pardalis
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 25,817
Originally Posted by Christophera View Post
That lower part of the core was so strong that even a demo had to wait a second to get the steel out of the way.
OK, but where do you get that? How have you come to this conclusion?

Quote:
btw, In answer to your earlier question, I think I skipped answering, the outer tube is a steel framework and the inner is a concrete tube.
I'm just wondering if "tube" is an apropriate term. Does it have a special meaning in engeneering?
Pardalis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 07:33 PM   #1707
Christophera
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,760
Originally Posted by Christophera
You cannot be serious. You with no evidence acuse me with 2 web sites having a great deal of evidence of having no evidence. And you are the same poeter who cannot come up with an alternative explanation for what must obviously be 3" REBAR ON 4' CENTERS. Exactly what i would expect, but not what you need to assert steel core columns because none are shown where you say they should be.
Originally Posted by Gravy View Post
Websites do not an argument make. You don't understand that you need evidence that supports your claims. You don't have any. Your websites and posts here are solid drivel. You've been shown to be wrong every single time.

Every single time, Christophera. You haven't been right once.

And you still think you're right. You're a very sad, delusional person. Please get help.
You think youv'e conducted an argument.

A thought alone, because you've produced no qualified evidence and your reasoning in attempt to dismiss raw evidence is flawed and deceptive. Your disatisfaction makes clear, that you are not a gracious loser.
Christophera is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 07:37 PM   #1708
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
 
Hellbound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not in Hell, but I can see it from here on a clear day...
Posts: 14,388
Originally Posted by Christophera View Post
Maybe Huntsman can explain what it takes to get 47 tempered steel columns to lose all their strength and fall freely instantly.

Here is a clue. Which is most dense?
I can, actually.

Because the columns were tack welded together, so the joins were weaker than the steel.

The steel gave when several floors fell onto the damaged sections, and from there it's like toppling building blocks.

You can do an experiment at home. Take a board, and stack ten wooden blocks (the rectangular kind) up longways to make columns. Support your board on theose columns. Add weight to the top. If you have it balanced right, the columns are fairly sturdy because of the weight pressing them together. You really only need very light support (small pieces of tape, say) just to make sure the wooden blocks are lined up with each other.

Now, get a coupl eof the blocks (say the ones about 80% of the way up) and replace them with something else, rolls of paper, say, to simulate the damaged steel columns. Then put your weight back on.

Let me know what happens.

Now, your reinforced concrete is a whole different story. That's more like using columns made of modeling clay, wrapped with chicken wire.

The steel columns are, typically, less likely to fail due to most causes, but when they fail, that's it. It's gone.
__________________
History does not always repeat itself. Sometimes it just yells "Can't you remember anything I told you?" and lets fly with a club. - John w. Campbell
Hellbound is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 07:40 PM   #1709
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
 
Hellbound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not in Hell, but I can see it from here on a clear day...
Posts: 14,388
Originally Posted by Christophera View Post
Why not use common sense? That is what REAL analysis starts with. Oh ,...... sorry, I forgot, that's why you are having a problem.
No.

REAL analysis starts with evidence, then does the math.

Common Sense is, at best, only a starting point, and even then it's often not the best one.
__________________
History does not always repeat itself. Sometimes it just yells "Can't you remember anything I told you?" and lets fly with a club. - John w. Campbell
Hellbound is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 07:42 PM   #1710
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
 
Hellbound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not in Hell, but I can see it from here on a clear day...
Posts: 14,388
Originally Posted by Christophera View Post
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...1&d=1151007490

The hallways of the towers clearly show they were different. A single hall across the narrow axis of WTC 1 and 2 hallways across WTC 2 long axis is seen.

I remember the documentary explaining how difficult it was to rent space in WTC 1 because access across the core was so bad.
Um, you realize the pic you posted here does not suppor thte idea of a hallway?

Do the scaling.

That "single central hallway" you mention is the same all the way to the top (where you can still see the steel core columns above the current upper level). Not to mention that that single hallway would be on the order of 20 feet across.
__________________
History does not always repeat itself. Sometimes it just yells "Can't you remember anything I told you?" and lets fly with a club. - John w. Campbell
Hellbound is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 07:50 PM   #1711
TheFeds
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 64
Originally Posted by Christophera View Post
And you are the same poeter who cannot come up with an alternative explanation for what must obviously be 3" REBAR ON 4' CENTERS. Exactly what i would expect, but not what you need to assert steel core columns because none are shown where you say they should be.
Take that picture, at its current size, and draw on it a dimenson arrow indicating 4', positioned as if it were at the distance of the WTC building. To demonstrate, I'll draw a dimension arrow for the vehicle in the foreground (it's very close to 6.25' tall), so that you know how to draw dimension marks. You draw a dimension mark across the 4' rebar-centres, or, if they're not visible in the photograph, draw a 4' dimension positioned where they would have been (if the tower were not collapsing).
Attached Images
File Type: jpg spire_dust-3.jpg (34.5 KB, 10 views)
TheFeds is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 07:55 PM   #1712
Christophera
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,760
Originally Posted by Huntsman View Post
I can, actually.

Because the columns were tack welded together, so the joins were weaker than the steel.
Below is a 100% butt weld joining an interior box column. To the right and above the floor beam intersection is an area discolored from being heated then ground level with the surrounding columns face.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...1&d=1151031086

That is actually laughable. They couldn't be called core columns because they are not continuos.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg image5.jpg (31.4 KB, 14 views)
Christophera is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 08:00 PM   #1713
NobbyNobbs
Gazerbeam's Protege
 
NobbyNobbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,617
Originally Posted by Christophera
Why not use common sense? That is what REAL analysis starts with. Oh ,...... sorry, I forgot, that's why you are having a problem.
Let me give you what I wrote in another forum on the subject of common sense.

Originally Posted by Me
And here is exactly the problem with this "innate sense": it doesn't work. If someone tried to explain quantum physics to you, it defies common sense. Yet experiments again and again bear out the theory.

You mention centrifugal motion. This is a perfect example. Someone traveling in a curved line could swear that there's a force pushing or pulling them outward. Their "innate sense" that leads them to understand this is a law of physics is leading them wrong. There is no force pushing them outward, despite that "feeling". This is why science doesn't depend on feelings or innate senses....it depends on experimental data.

Later on....
Originally Posted by Christophera
The information I trust is an image of a concrete stairway and I haven't checked the rest of site out much
Why do you trust that image in particular? What about it makes it trustworthy?

Later still....
Originally Posted by christophera
2) There are visual and seismic records. You are seeing a visual record in the above link and the USGS has original digital seismic files they refuse to release.
If they haven't released these files, how do you know they exist?
__________________
I wish someone would find something I wrote on this board to be sig-worthy, thereby effectively granting me immortality.--Antiquehunter
The gods do not deduct from a man's allotted years on earth the time spent eating butterscotch pudding.
AMERICA! NUMBER 1 IN PARTICLE PHYSICS SINCE JULY 4TH, 1776!!! --SusanConstant
NobbyNobbs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 08:03 PM   #1714
Christophera
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,760
Originally Posted by TheFeds View Post
Take that picture, at its current size, and draw on it a dimenson arrow indicating 4', positioned as if it were at the distance of the WTC building. To demonstrate, I'll draw a dimension arrow for the vehicle in the foreground (it's very close to 6.25' tall), so that you know how to draw dimension marks. You draw a dimension mark across the 4' rebar-centres, or, if they're not visible in the photograph, draw a 4' dimension positioned where they would have been (if the tower were not collapsing).
This sounds like a fun nonsensical project. Consider that the lines viewed are not their true length. Meaning you've just invented a "photoshop moment", if one is into wasting time.
Christophera is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 08:05 PM   #1715
RandFan
Mormon Atheist
 
RandFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 60,134
Originally Posted by Christophera View Post
This sounds like a fun nonsensical project. Consider that the lines viewed are not their true length. Meaning you've just invented a "photoshop moment", if one is into wasting time.
??? Are you serious. Here you make all of the claims of how big things are based on looking at them and now you are saying that is not possible? Wow, that's quite an admission.
__________________
Ego, ain't it a bitch?
RandFan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 08:07 PM   #1716
Christophera
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,760
Originally Posted by NobbyNobbs View Post
Why do you trust that image in particular? What about it makes it trustworthy?

Can we believe noobers is asking this? I trust the image of a concrete stair to be a concrete stair. Simple thing.

If they haven't released these files, how do you know they exist?
I have associates that are scientists who tried to get the raw seismic files. they were able to get USGS seismometer output files of quarry blasts but not 9-11.
Christophera is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 08:07 PM   #1717
RandFan
Mormon Atheist
 
RandFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 60,134
Originally Posted by TheFeds View Post
Take that picture, at its current size, and draw on it a dimenson arrow indicating 4', positioned as if it were at the distance of the WTC building. To demonstrate, I'll draw a dimension arrow for the vehicle in the foreground (it's very close to 6.25' tall), so that you know how to draw dimension marks. You draw a dimension mark across the 4' rebar-centres, or, if they're not visible in the photograph, draw a 4' dimension positioned where they would have been (if the tower were not collapsing).
That's a good empirical way to demonstrate size. The vehicle gives us scale. This would be allowed in a court of law.
__________________
Ego, ain't it a bitch?
RandFan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 08:08 PM   #1718
Christophera
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,760
Originally Posted by Huntsman View Post
No.

REAL analysis starts with evidence, then does the math.

Common Sense is, at best, only a starting point, and even then it's often not the best one.
You are forgetting the algebraic assimilation of the evidence that occurs before the math.
Christophera is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 08:10 PM   #1719
RandFan
Mormon Atheist
 
RandFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 60,134
Originally Posted by Christophera View Post
You are forgetting the algebraic assimilation of the evidence that occurs before the math.
? WTF? What is "algebraic assimilation"? I'm guessing that you made that up?
__________________
Ego, ain't it a bitch?
RandFan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2006, 08:12 PM   #1720
Christophera
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,760
Originally Posted by RandFan View Post
That's a good empirical way to demonstrate size. The vehicle gives us scale. This would be allowed in a court of law.
The spire can be used to scale it at the same distance. It is a minimum of 14 inches thick.
Christophera is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:44 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.