• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W:57: 1585]Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

Quag said:
You need to learn the meaning of molten it doesn't mean glowing with heat
Click to expand...


It does mean liquid metal dripping.
 
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

ChrisABrown said:
I work in engineering, mostly surveying and layout for construction.

I also present photographic evidence of the true core structure of the Twins with independent evidence verifying it. For example, see page 5 of the November 2001 report by a structural engineer certified in 12 states identifying a concrete core.

This pdf was originally hosted on the the server of ncsea, "National Council of Structural Engineers Associations"

NCSEA
I downloaded it and then put it on my server
http://algoxy.com/psych/images3/domel-www.ncsea.down.pdf
Click to expand...

And??
 
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

ChrisABrown said:
All the evidence indicates you are wrong. Give up.
Click to expand...

There is no evidence that supports your claims
 
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

ChrisABrown said:
It means if the public knew that there was a rectangular, tubular concrete core, they would be asking, "Where are all the big chunks of concrete?", because there are almost none.

Yes thermite is the only way that much heat could get where is was and sustain. Particles of thermite kept igniting. The thermal imaging could be used to quantify the total thermal event. I don't do that.
Click to expand...

Those members of the public who are capable of asking questions about the official story already have. The existence of the concrete core is way too sophisticated a detail for most. Those members of the public who have asked questions and studied on their own already know the official story to be pure poppycock.

Those who, 17 years later, still believe the official story are incapable of asking questions, or at least confronting the bitter truth. For them the concrete core didn't exist, and the high temperatures didn't exist. They live in a state of denial of facts.

Good luck with your posts here. I will read them all.
 
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

ChrisABrown said:
It means if the public knew that there was a rectangular, tubular concrete core, they would be asking, "Where are all the big chunks of concrete?", because there are almost none.

Yes thermite is the only way that much heat could get where is was and sustain. Particles of thermite kept igniting. The thermal imaging could be used to quantify the total thermal event. I don't do that.
Click to expand...

What is your thoughts on this sites information
A World Trade Center Collapse Investigative Resource - World Trade Center Evidence-Based Research

Core Box Columns: Types of Distortion Damage - World Trade Center Evidence-Based Research

The WTC Cores As Seen In Construction Photos - World Trade Center Evidence-Based Research
 
Last edited:
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

Thoreau72 said:
Those members of the public who are capable of asking questions about the official story already have. The existence of the concrete core is way too sophisticated a detail for most. Those members of the public who have asked questions and studied on their own already know the official story to be pure poppycock.

Those who, 17 years later, still believe the official story are incapable of asking questions, or at least confronting the bitter truth. For them the concrete core didn't exist, and the high temperatures didn't exist. They live in a state of denial of facts.

Good luck with your posts here. I will read them all.
Click to expand...

Not that you are wrong about the denial of facts, but, a simple fact can be established and that is that the official investigation product utilized erroneous design and construction to make its determination. It outright renders the cause of death assumed from the final engineering calculations, using the wrong core design, falacious.

And again your description is accurate "For them the concrete core didn't exist, and the high temperatures didn't exist. " because the public is using major cognitive distortions to enable dissociation, a more potent, unconscious action than denial. That diminishes as social pressures change from having one significant truth showing "inside job", a cognitive distortion of labeling that skips over the details to make an assumption of something wrong, justifying it, never understanding it.

No wild crys of of "demolition", only, "Gee Martha, I guess the WTC commission and NIST faked the investigation because they erroneously assumed the towers had completely different core structures than actually had. Guiliani took all of the evidence and illegally put it into his private warehouse." LOL, so they couldn't find it. And again, the way people generally think, all that may be too much to be conscious, but intuitive processes can arrive at the same conclusion. Just takes time.
 
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

mike2810 said:
What is your thoughts on this sites information
A World Trade Center Collapse Investigative Resource - World Trade Center Evidence-Based Research

Core Box Columns: Types of Distortion Damage - World Trade Center Evidence-Based Research

The WTC Cores As Seen In Construction Photos - World Trade Center Evidence-Based Research
Click to expand...

LOL! "Core Box Columns", a steel framed core will have extensive diagonal bracing and gussetting. Never is that seen on 9/11 Lawyers Committee for 9/11 refuses to use the evidence or conduct honest discourse about what the evidence does show.

Here is my exchange with them lcfor911.org. Do you remember CANN NYC? Same crap. Here the lawyers are refusing to acknowledge that Guiliani took the photos, video and logically the plans. The lawyers know they are asking for something that their side already has. BS.

Message actions
* Reply to sender Reply to list or to sender and all recipients Forward the message * Open in new window
Subject: Re: Request to Amend A Vital Record

From
supporters@lcfor911.org
Date
Tue 18:05

Attachments
• WTC2_Core.png (~710 KB)Show options
Message Body

Hello*Christopher,

In the NCSEA document the word concrete appears only twice. *The concrete core they describe, I believe, is the office floor slab and elevator lobbies, and mechanical rooms.

I have studied the drawings extensively, looked at the photos and videos. *I can find no images showing any vertical formwork which would be necessary for a core surrounding the elevator and utility shafts.

The original specifications called for a steel core framework which held thick drywall panels surrounding the elevators, stairs, and everything else not considered regular office space.

In*this*image*of*the*WTC2*core*columns*I*see*no*vertical*concrete*walls.

Thank*you*for*your*feedback,
David*Cole

On*2018-08-14*00:08,*christopher@algoxy.com*wrote:
Thank*you*for*your*reply*David*Cole,


I*was*hoping*for*someone*to*look*at*this*info*found*on*the*page,

New York Civil Liberties Union Press Release February 6, 200

I linked to first in my message, it explains why these things are not available.

"1.**Photos*or*videos*of*concrete*formwork*being*installed*or*removed
from*the*core*area*of*the*towers.

2.**Photos*or*videos*of*pouring*concrete*into*core*formwork.

3.**Testimony*of*concrete*contractors*or*the*contracts*related*to
pouring*the*core."

The*NYCLU*wrote*a*letter*to*bloomberg*notifying*him*that*FOIL*laws
were*violated*by*guiliani*when*no*inventory*of*what*he*had*transferred
from*the*NYC*dpt.*of*buildings*civic*center*room,*to*his*private
warehouse,*"the*fortress"*15,000*photos*and*videos.**The*plans*were
there*too,*or,*at*least*the*exterior*steel*structure.

Please*consider*I*have*replied*reasonably*to*your*request*for*a
specific*form*of*evidence*and*presented*good*reason*to*not*be*able*to
provide*those*things,*which*you*should*know*because*of*what*I
originally*emailed.**I*did*so*with*a*great*deal*of*independently
verified*information*also*showing*a*concrete*core.

So*therefore*I*ask,*please,*David,*(1)can*you*provide*one*image*from
9/11*showing*the*supposed*steel*framed*core*structure?**(2)And,*do*you
know*exactly*what*a*steel*framed*core*structure*looks*like?**There*are
specific*structural*members*required*and*if*in*the*Twins,*they*would
be*robust.**(3)Can*you*name*them,*there*are*3?

The*evidence*I*have*for*a*concrete*core*is*robust,*but*in*a*different
form*than*you*request.**Very*direct,*from*one*of*the*highest
structural*authorities*in*the*nation,*the*National*Council*of
Structural*Engineers*Associations.

http://algoxy.com/psych/images3/domel-www.ncsea.down.pdf

It is reasonable to use available information to arrive at explanations.

Be*well!

Chris
~~~~~
BTW, the sharprinting guys are misinfo spinners. I debated them for some months years ago.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

ChrisABrown said:
Not that you are wrong about the denial of facts, but, a simple fact can be established and that is that the official investigation product utilized erroneous design and construction to make its determination. It outright renders the cause of death assumed from the final engineering calculations, using the wrong core design, falacious.

And again your description is accurate "For them the concrete core didn't exist, and the high temperatures didn't exist. " because the public is using major cognitive distortions to enable dissociation, a more potent, unconscious action than denial. That diminishes as social pressures change from having one significant truth showing "inside job", a cognitive distortion of labeling that skips over the details to make an assumption of something wrong, justifying it, never understanding it.

No wild crys of of "demolition", only, "Gee Martha, I guess the WTC commission and NIST faked the investigation because they erroneously assumed the towers had completely different core structures than actually had. Guiliani took all of the evidence and illegally put it into his private warehouse." LOL, so they couldn't find it. And again, the way people generally think, all that may be too much to be conscious, but intuitive processes can arrive at the same conclusion. Just takes time.
Click to expand...

Yes, the assumption of different core structures is problematic.

Indeed, everything about the Commission is problematic. The entire process was a fraud, as intended by the neocons who set it up. Zelikow had an outline written up that advanced a conclusion. They did not follow good science, they followed a political agenda.

They were not seeking the truth, they were telling an official story which protected the guilty parties and satisfied an uncurious public, rather as the Warren Commission did in its time.
 
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

ChrisABrown said:
LOL! "Core Box Columns", a steel framed core will have extensive diagonal bracing and gussetting. Never is that seen on 9/11 Lawyers Committee for 9/11 refuses to use the evidence or conduct honest discourse about what the evidence does show.

Here is my exchange with them lcfor911.org. Do you remember CANN NYC? Same crap. Here the lawyers are refusing to acknowledge that Guiliani took the photos, video and logically the plans. The lawyers know they are asking for something that their side already has. BS.

Message actions
* Reply to sender Reply to list or to sender and all recipients Forward the message * Open in new window
Subject: Re: Request to Amend A Vital Record

From
supporters@lcfor911.org
Date
Tue 18:05

Attachments
• WTC2_Core.png (~710 KB)Show options
Message Body

Hello*Christopher,

In the NCSEA document the word concrete appears only twice. *The concrete core they describe, I believe, is the office floor slab and elevator lobbies, and mechanical rooms.

I have studied the drawings extensively, looked at the photos and videos. *I can find no images showing any vertical formwork which would be necessary for a core surrounding the elevator and utility shafts.

The original specifications called for a steel core framework which held thick drywall panels surrounding the elevators, stairs, and everything else not considered regular office space.

In*this*image*of*the*WTC2*core*columns*I*see*no*vertical*concrete*walls.

Thank*you*for*your*feedback,
David*Cole

On*2018-08-14*00:08,*christopher@algoxy.com*wrote:
Thank*you*for*your*reply*David*Cole,


I*was*hoping*for*someone*to*look*at*this*info*found*on*the*page,

New York Civil Liberties Union Press Release February 6, 200

I linked to first in my message, it explains why these things are not available.

"1.**Photos*or*videos*of*concrete*formwork*being*installed*or*removed
from*the*core*area*of*the*towers.

2.**Photos*or*videos*of*pouring*concrete*into*core*formwork.

3.**Testimony*of*concrete*contractors*or*the*contracts*related*to
pouring*the*core."

The*NYCLU*wrote*a*letter*to*bloomberg*notifying*him*that*FOIL*laws
were*violated*by*guiliani*when*no*inventory*of*what*he*had*transferred
from*the*NYC*dpt.*of*buildings*civic*center*room,*to*his*private
warehouse,*"the*fortress"*15,000*photos*and*videos.**The*plans*were
there*too,*or,*at*least*the*exterior*steel*structure.

Please*consider*I*have*replied*reasonably*to*your*request*for*a
specific*form*of*evidence*and*presented*good*reason*to*not*be*able*to
provide*those*things,*which*you*should*know*because*of*what*I
originally*emailed.**I*did*so*with*a*great*deal*of*independently
verified*information*also*showing*a*concrete*core.

So*therefore*I*ask,*please,*David,*(1)can*you*provide*one*image*from
9/11*showing*the*supposed*steel*framed*core*structure?**(2)And,*do*you
know*exactly*what*a*steel*framed*core*structure*looks*like?**There*are
specific*structural*members*required*and*if*in*the*Twins,*they*would
be*robust.**(3)Can*you*name*them,*there*are*3?

The*evidence*I*have*for*a*concrete*core*is*robust,*but*in*a*different
form*than*you*request.**Very*direct,*from*one*of*the*highest
structural*authorities*in*the*nation,*the*National*Council*of
Structural*Engineers*Associations.

http://algoxy.com/psych/images3/domel-www.ncsea.down.pdf

It is reasonable to use available information to arrive at explanations.

Be*well!

Chris
~~~~~
BTW, the sharprinting guys are misinfo spinners. I debated them for some months years ago.
Click to expand...

What are they misinfo spinning?
What is interesting is the site I provided does not draw any conclusions. Unlike you.

- Question: We know you believe thermite was used. Do you believe mini neutron bombs were used?

- When can we expect your paper outlining how the controlled demolition of the towers was done?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

mike2810 said:
ChrisABrown said:
LOL! "Core Box Columns", a steel framed core will have extensive diagonal bracing and gussetting. Never is that seen on 9/11 Lawyers Committee for 9/11 refuses to use the evidence or conduct honest discourse about what the evidence does show.

Here is my exchange with them lcfor911.org. Do you remember CANN NYC? Same crap. Here the lawyers are refusing to acknowledge that Guiliani took the photos, video and logically the plans. The lawyers know they are asking for something that their side already has. BS.

Message actions
* Reply to sender Reply to list or to sender and all recipients Forward the message * Open in new window
Subject: Re: Request to Amend A Vital Record

From
supporters@lcfor911.org
Date
Tue 18:05

Attachments
• WTC2_Core.png (~710 KB)Show options
Message Body

Hello*Christopher,

In the NCSEA document the word concrete appears only twice. *The concrete core they describe, I believe, is the office floor slab and elevator lobbies, and mechanical rooms.

I have studied the drawings extensively, looked at the photos and videos. *I can find no images showing any vertical formwork which would be necessary for a core surrounding the elevator and utility shafts.

The original specifications called for a steel core framework which held thick drywall panels surrounding the elevators, stairs, and everything else not considered regular office space.

In*this*image*of*the*WTC2*core*columns*I*see*no*vertical*concrete*walls.

Thank*you*for*your*feedback,
David*Cole

On*2018-08-14*00:08,*christopher@algoxy.com*wrote:
Thank*you*for*your*reply*David*Cole,


I*was*hoping*for*someone*to*look*at*this*info*found*on*the*page,

New York Civil Liberties Union Press Release February 6, 200

I linked to first in my message, it explains why these things are not available.

"1.**Photos*or*videos*of*concrete*formwork*being*installed*or*removed
from*the*core*area*of*the*towers.

2.**Photos*or*videos*of*pouring*concrete*into*core*formwork.

3.**Testimony*of*concrete*contractors*or*the*contracts*related*to
pouring*the*core."

The*NYCLU*wrote*a*letter*to*bloomberg*notifying*him*that*FOIL*laws
were*violated*by*guiliani*when*no*inventory*of*what*he*had*transferred
from*the*NYC*dpt.*of*buildings*civic*center*room,*to*his*private
warehouse,*"the*fortress"*15,000*photos*and*videos.**The*plans*were
there*too,*or,*at*least*the*exterior*steel*structure.

Please*consider*I*have*replied*reasonably*to*your*request*for*a
specific*form*of*evidence*and*presented*good*reason*to*not*be*able*to
provide*those*things,*which*you*should*know*because*of*what*I
originally*emailed.**I*did*so*with*a*great*deal*of*independently
verified*information*also*showing*a*concrete*core.

So*therefore*I*ask,*please,*David,*(1)can*you*provide*one*image*from
9/11*showing*the*supposed*steel*framed*core*structure?**(2)And,*do*you
know*exactly*what*a*steel*framed*core*structure*looks*like?**There*are
specific*structural*members*required*and*if*in*the*Twins,*they*would
be*robust.**(3)Can*you*name*them,*there*are*3?

The*evidence*I*have*for*a*concrete*core*is*robust,*but*in*a*different
form*than*you*request.**Very*direct,*from*one*of*the*highest
structural*authorities*in*the*nation,*the*National*Council*of
Structural*Engineers*Associations.

http://algoxy.com/psych/images3/domel-www.ncsea.down.pdf

It is reasonable to use available information to arrive at explanations.

Be*well!

Chris
~~~~~
Click to expand...

What are they misinfo spinning?
What is interesting is the site I provided does not draw any conclusions. Unlike you.

- Question: We know you believe thermite was used. Do you believe mini neutron bombs were used?

- When can we expect your paper outlining how the controlled demolition of the towers was done?
Click to expand...

They are spinning with making no conclusion to muddy the water with psuedo rational that simply complicates things. Selectivity.

No nuclear devices.

I have a page that provides a full description of how the demo was donw nd it is back by a Ph.D in physics who specialized in material testing. He stated when he first called my it was the only technically detailed explanation in existence that was based on evidence that was independently verified.

Demolition, the truth of 9-11, Twin Towers

Demolition, the truth of 9-11, Twin Towers
Click to expand...
 
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

ChrisABrown said:
mike2810 said:
They are spinning with making no conclusion to muddy the water with psuedo rational that simply complicates things. Selectivity.

No nuclear devices.

I have a page that provides a full description of how the demo was donw nd it is back by a Ph.D in physics who specialized in material testing. He stated when he first called my it was the only technically detailed explanation in existence that was based on evidence that was independently verified.

Demolition, the truth of 9-11, Twin Towers

Demolition, the truth of 9-11, Twin Towers
Click to expand...

Your links are also spin sites.

Take for example Mark Basile: He collected funds to have an independent lab analyze some wtc dust. He was only to ask them to tell him what was in it and not tell the lab the source of the material. He has never finished the project. No results.
Mark Basile

Others have tried to verify thermite (nano or other) in the WTC dust. Results are mixed to negative in duplicating the Niels Harrit analysis.

Have you been in contact with Jones or Gage at AE911T? Seems you could have saved them a bunch of money for the yet to be released Alaska University Study.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

ChrisABrown said:
mike2810 said:
They are spinning with making no conclusion to muddy the water with psuedo rational that simply complicates things. Selectivity.

No nuclear devices.

I have a page that provides a full description of how the demo was donw nd it is back by a Ph.D in physics who specialized in material testing. He stated when he first called my it was the only technically detailed explanation in existence that was based on evidence that was independently verified.

Demolition, the truth of 9-11, Twin Towers

Demolition, the truth of 9-11, Twin Towers
Click to expand...

There was a lot of concrete in the core - it's what people walked on. But there was no vertical concrete structure that took any gravity load whatsoever. Book 3 of the structural drawings show the details for the steel columns and book 6 has the bracing details. There was diagonal bracing at lower and beamed floors around the MER levels, but most diagonals that can be seen at the construction phase were temporary for the cranes and the temporary elevator that they used.

To have vertical concrete in the core such as you are talking about would have served only to put an additional load on the steels that they would have been supported by. In the attached pic you can see the diagonal bracing at the perimeter of the core which remained, and also the temp diagonal supports for the lifting gear.

trident3_1.jpg
https://imgur.com/a/VKaFMZm

Can you show me a pic of some vertical concrete structure in the core ?
Click to expand...
 
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

gerrycan said:
ChrisABrown said:
There was a lot of concrete in the core - it's what people walked on. But there was no vertical concrete structure that took any gravity load whatsoever. Book 3 of the structural drawings show the details for the steel columns and book 6 has the bracing details. There was diagonal bracing at lower and beamed floors around the MER levels, but most diagonals that can be seen at the construction phase were temporary for the cranes and the temporary elevator that they used.

To have vertical concrete in the core such as you are talking about would have served only to put an additional load on the steels that they would have been supported by. In the attached pic you can see the diagonal bracing at the perimeter of the core which remained, and also the temp diagonal supports for the lifting gear.

View attachment 67241886
https://imgur.com/a/VKaFMZm

Can you show me a pic of some vertical concrete structure in the core ?
Click to expand...

You need to address your question to ChrisABrown. His post I quoted was messed up. What I responded with to his post was:

"What are they misinfo spinning?
What is interesting is the site I provided does not draw any conclusions. Unlike you.
- Question: We know you believe thermite was used. Do you believe mini neutron bombs were used?
- When can we expect your paper outlining how the controlled demolition of the towers was done?
Click to expand...
 
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

mike2810 said:
ChrisABrown said:
Your links are also spin sites.

Take for example Mark Basile: He collected funds to have an independent lab analyze some wtc dust. He was only to ask them to tell him what was in it and not tell the lab the source of the material. He has never finished the project. No results.
Mark Basile

Others have tried to verify thermite (nano or other) in the WTC dust. Results are mixed to negative in duplicating the Niels Harrit analysis.

Have you been in contact with Jones or Gage at AE911T? Seems you could have saved them a bunch of money for the yet to be released Alaska University Study.
Click to expand...

The links are my site and if you think its spin you probably do not know the evidence my site presents as compared to those trying to say it is a spin site.

Jones I spoke with in 2004 and he knows, but he is playing for the other team. You can hear him here interviewing Leslie Robertson in boulder for a "we are change" broadcast. There is an edit right where Robertson would say "concrete core walls" and jones voices comes in and says "steel core columns". You will find links to the full audio and then exerpts that highlight the specific moment.

Gage banned me from AE right away when they started with a message board, then got rid of it. He insists on thinking that plans from silverstien for the worlds tallest buildings were drawn in pencil and hand lettered in the title block. He ignores the pixelized anomalies appearing on 20% of the sheets in the revision table cells. A clear photoshop job to try and make the plans look like working drawings.

1967fakeplan.titblk.jpg


A-A-159.revtab.jpg


gWTC1rev.tabAA-99.jpg


I emailed and called Hulsey in Alaska with no results. There is misleading or an agenda there.

There is a simple rule and about 95% of the time it works for understanding exactly what kind of info our world has in store for us.

~~~Everything is to see, find, hear and do, is put there for us by tryants for use see, find, hear and do.~~~

Social fears and manipulations are used to control what peoples perceptions of the truth are.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

gerrycan said:
ChrisABrown said:
There was a lot of concrete in the core - it's what people walked on. But there was no vertical concrete structure that took any gravity load whatsoever. Book 3 of the structural drawings show the details for the steel columns and book 6 has the bracing details. There was diagonal bracing at lower and beamed floors around the MER levels, but most diagonals that can be seen at the construction phase were temporary for the cranes and the temporary elevator that they used.

To have vertical concrete in the core such as you are talking about would have served only to put an additional load on the steels that they would have been supported by. In the attached pic you can see the diagonal bracing at the perimeter of the core which remained, and also the temp diagonal supports for the lifting gear.

View attachment 67241886
https://imgur.com/a/VKaFMZm

Can you show me a pic of some vertical concrete structure in the core ?
Click to expand...

One half of the WTC2 core is standing without the exterior steel in this picture.

southcorestands.gif


A massive piece of the WTC1 core wall topples out of the wall in this .gif made from frames of a video.

core_animation_75.gif


It is pretty clear you do not know the structural elements of the tower from the tools used to build it in your pic.

Independently verifying the pics posted is a copy of a safety report done FOR FEMA by a structural engineer certified in 12 states in november of 2001 stating there was a concrete core, see page 5.

http://algoxy.com/psych/images3/domel-www.ncsea.down.pdf
Click to expand...
 
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

mike2810 said:
What are they misinfo spinning?
What is interesting is the site I provided does not draw any conclusions. Unlike you.
Click to expand...

I visited their site again and found it to be all over the place. Literally, a dozen or so peoples perspective on different things. My site is focused with evidence. Completely different approach.
 
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

ChrisABrown said:
gerrycan said:
One half of the WTC2 core is standing without the exterior steel in this picture.

southcorestands.gif


A massive piece of the WTC1 core wall topples out of the wall in this .gif made from frames of a video.

core_animation_75.gif


It is pretty clear you do not know the structural elements of the tower from the tools used to build it in your pic.

Independently verifying the pics posted is a copy of a safety report done FOR FEMA by a structural engineer certified in 12 states in november of 2001 stating there was a concrete core, see page 5.

http://algoxy.com/psych/images3/domel-www.ncsea.down.pdf
Click to expand...

Your pic is EXACTLY what you'd expect to see in the steel cored WTC buildings.

Tell me, what was the structural function of your imaginary concrete core? (keep in mind the layout below floor 9 when you answer).
Here's another picture from that level to help you......
https://imgur.com/a/u6jBSw2
82e5a212225a58548b4a57b52d51d3a6.jpg
Click to expand...
 
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

gerrycan said:
ChrisABrown said:
Your pic is EXACTLY what you'd expect to see in the steel cored WTC buildings.

Tell me, what was the structural function of your imaginary concrete core? (keep in mind the layout below floor 9 when you answer)
Click to expand...

Hmmm, something missing here.

Can you tell me the 3 major visible structural elements of a steel framed rectangular structure?
Click to expand...
 
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

ChrisABrown said:
gerrycan said:
Hmmm, something missing here.

Can you tell me the 3 major visible structural elements of a steel framed rectangular structure?
Click to expand...

What's missing is your answer to the straight question that you were asked regarding the structural function of your supposed concrete core. The layout to floor 9 of the towers is quite clear and presents no constant load path to bedrock, other than the steel core columns, for such a concrete structure had it existed in the core above that level.

What IS important to note about the concrete that existed in the core is that in each of the 3 tower sections above fl9 there was an increasing amount of concrete in the core area as each of the sections increased in height. This was due to there being less elevators required as each section progressed. Notable also that there was a constant horizontal concrete band connecting E-W and N-S open office areas that ran through the core.

Note that in the illustration below there is no vertical concrete, but viewed distantly that fact would not be discernable and one could easily view the structure and erroneously conclude that there was indeed a vertical concrete gravity load bearing structure existant throughout. Perhaps you could point out to me where you believe the vertical concrete WOULD have existed as per the illustration, and I will look through the structural drawings and inspection/construction pics and find that particular area for you. If indeed there is any evidence of what you say existed there, I will be more than happy to have learnt of this from you and will thank you no end for it.

Not gonna happen though, is it.

image from 10.1.1.125.7617-38.jpg
https://imgur.com/a/4zg46Fn
Click to expand...
 
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

gerrycan said:
What's missing is your answer to the straight question that you were asked regarding the structural function of your supposed concrete core. The layout to floor 9 of the towers is quite clear and presents no constant load path to bedrock, other than the steel core columns, for such a concrete structure had it existed in the core above that level.

What IS important to note about the concrete that existed in the core is that in each of the 3 tower sections above fl9 there was an increasing amount of concrete in the core area as each of the sections increased in height. This was due to there being less elevators required as each section progressed. Notable also that there was a constant horizontal concrete band connecting E-W and N-S open office areas that ran through the core.

Note that in the illustration below there is no vertical concrete, but viewed distantly that fact would not be discernable and one could easily view the structure and erroneously conclude that there was indeed a vertical concrete gravity load bearing structure existant throughout. Perhaps you could point out to me where you believe the vertical concrete WOULD have existed as per the illustration, and I will look through the structural drawings and inspection/construction pics and find that particular area for you. If indeed there is any evidence of what you say existed there, I will be more than happy to have learnt of this from you and will thank you no end for it.

Not gonna happen though, is it.
Click to expand...

Umm, I will not accept some crap graphic. TELL ME what the 3 major visible structural elements of a steel framed structure are.

And this IS not what would be expected of a steel framed core under any conditions. It is exactly what would be expected of a concrete core.

southcorestands.gif


And that image is confirmed by a piece of the core wall of WTC1 toppling from its position.

core_animation_75.gif


They are supported by this report from November 2001 by a structural engineer certified in 12 states. See page 5.

http://algoxy.com/psych/images3/domel-www.ncsea.down.pdf

That safety report of August Domel, structural engineer certified in 12 states is matched by the 1992 Oxford Encyclopedia of Technology and Innovation.
http://algoxy.com/conc/images/oxfordarchcore.jpg

You've failed to respond reasonably regarding the image of the WTC 2 core and evaded consideration of the engineering report and the video frames showing the wall. Then posted a crap drawing that is ERRONEOUS.

Now show us what you know about structural steel framing. Answer the question.

ALL CORE structures resist torsion and sway. WTF do I have to tell you that? You are supposed to know what you are talking about. ANSWER MY QUESTION.
 
Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

ChrisABrown said:
I visited their site again and found it to be all over the place. Literally, a dozen or so peoples perspective on different things. My site is focused with evidence. Completely different approach.
Click to expand...

Really? A dozen or so peoples perspective? It is a visual archive. There is image analysis done by some other than the author. I will bet you really have not studied what is presented.

"In retrospect, the single biggest obstacle for many participants within such discussions, including mathematicians, physicists, chemists, engineers, computer programmers and journalists, was their own head-strong vanity which led to premature states of false certainty. The evidence for this is everywhere one looks within years of recorded posting histories, published papers and articles written about the collapses. It became quite obvious that the less humility and caution one has when approaching these issues, the more certain that individual was to state blatantly untrue information and defend it to the point of absurdity.
A World Trade Center Collapse Investigative Resource - World Trade Center Evidence-Based Research

Are you saying your web site with its explanation is the one clear concise explanation for the destruction of WTC1 and 2?

So we can expect Gage, Jones, Prager, Griffin, etc. to announce that you are correct. Can't wait to read about it. :mrgreen:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom