Video Shows Concrete Core Wall Falling Into Core., No steel core columns ever seen in the core area. Options

[Christophera]

More an more evidence keeps showing up that substanciates the steel reinforced cast concrete, rectangular, tubular core of the Twin Towers. This means the entire truth movement is completely mislead and the post 9-11 psyops is running the truth movement.

Static Annotation of Triangular Concrete pic falling into the core of WTC 1
(IMG:http://i716.photobucket.com/albums/ww168/S_N_A_F_U/wtc1corefall2.jpg)

Slower animation sequence of the same piece of the WTC1 core wall destruction.
(IMG:http://i716.photobucket.com/albums/ww168/S_N_A_F_U/core_animation_75.gif)

That is absolutely a huge piece of concrete. The vertical steel seen are either elevator guide rail supports or box columns outside the core.

Here's the original video link so those who want the whole thing can get to it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dWBBEtA5bI[/quote]


The psyops has the truth movement using plans from silverstein who made $6 billion from insurance and it is easily shown the plans have been digitally altered to appear as final drawings and also remnants of ground zero prove the plans do not represent the design of the core.

fake plans

[amazed!]

Christophera

I had not read the Newsweek piece before. That does make your argument rather persuasive.

Judging from the statements he made to Newsweek, it almost sounds like Robertson was in on it.

And I suppose if your theory is valid, he would be?

[Christophera]

Christophera

I had not read the Newsweek piece before. That does make your argument rather persuasive.

Judging from the statements he made to Newsweek, it almost sounds like Robertson was in on it.

And I suppose if your theory is valid, he would be?

I think he was used to create plans that were obsolete before they were drawn with consideration of what was learned by the Tacoma narrows bridge collapse.

Steel Bridge flexes and collapses in 42 MPH wind

Badly used. I actually have great sympathy for him because after Yamasaki overode the original steel core column design, Robertson got fully behind the concrete core as much as he could and faithfully saw the buildings completed. THEN, silverstein used his obsolete plans to deceive the nation in private, very interested support for FEMA's deception by silverstein. It really sucks. If I was him, I would feel like sh*t. Major, dynamic grief, angst. He's certainly, logically, seen threats against family members if he speaks up.

That is why I feel this unregistered post is actually him. He appreciates what I'm doing, wants to help but cannot. Takes a chance and makes an ambigous post on April fools day.

http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=3108&view=findpost&p=78752

Leslie E. Robertson
Posted: Apr 1 2006, 06:33 PM

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

This post has been edited by Christophera: Jan 19 2009, 09:51 PM

[2knives]

"Christophera is correct in stating that the Twin Towers were constructed with a concrete core."

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

Whether this is Robertson or not, the pre 9/11 documentary evidence is on the side of there being a core.

The Nova special on why the WTC towers fell went out of its way to cover this up.

This post has been edited by 2knives: Feb 19 2009, 07:57 PM

[dMz]

Whether this is Robertson or not, the pre 9/11 documentary evidence is on the side of there being a core.

My bigger question would be whether or not a L. Robertson should be trusted. Wasn't he the guy "thinking" of 600mph Boeings completely devoid of fuel and also subcontracted on the NIST report??

http://wtc.nist.gov/solicitations/LERA_Award.htm

This page would suggest some involvement in the FEMA/ASCE Pentagon report as well. Hmmmm....

http://www.lera.com/sep11.htm

Bjohnson, you might find contact info at that link above (it appears to be Robertson's web page).

[bjohnson]

http://www.lera.com/sep11.htm

Bjohnson, you might find contact info at that link above (it appears to be Robertson's web page).

Well, I sent an inquiry to the e-address listed on that page yesterday- Friday, 20 February. I anxiously await a response, if I ever receive one. I guess I'll just keep my fingers crossed. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/thumbsup.gif)

[stannrodd]

The Newsweek article does not report that Leslie E Robertson made such a claim about the towers cores.

“Beyond the reaction that any citizen has—the sadness that we all feel—you have to understand, I worked long hours, seven days a week on this project back when I was young and energetic,” says the 73-year-old, his voice breaking with emotion. “It was just terrible to watch, painful and horrible.”

“If they had fallen down immediately, the death counts would have been unimaginable,” he says. “The World Trade Center has performed admirably, and everyone involved in the project should be proud.”

“As the fire raged it got hotter and hotter and the steel got weaker and weaker,” he says, adding that building a skyscraper able to handle such a blaze would not have been viable, financially and functionally. “You could always prepare for more and more extreme events, but there has to be a risk analysis of what’s reasonable.”

“I felt like we had taken their best shot.”

“We just have to hope that this country doesn’t turn into a fortress in order to deal with people like this.”

This following text is not a quote of Robertson but written by Katherine Stroup who has admitted her mistake.

Still, Robertson, whose firm is responsible for three of the six tallest buildings in the world, feels a sense of pride that the massive towers, supported by a steel-tube exoskeleton and a reinforced concrete core, held up as well as they did—managing to stand for over an hour despite direct hits from two massive commercial jetliners.

Bold type added by me. The bold type is the word of the reporter Katherine Stroup not Robertson. Katherine has been contacted about this and admits that this information was assumed from a poor source in the rush to publish.

The guest post is false and is not Robertson. I have been in contact with the man.

The core of the Tower pictured here shows a steel column structure.

(IMG:http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj16/stannrodd/im958lguq5.jpg)

Also here

(IMG:http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj16/stannrodd/im_652_lg.jpg)

here as well ..

(IMG:http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj16/stannrodd/im_580_lg.jpg)

another..

(IMG:http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj16/stannrodd/im_1011_lg.jpg)

The Youtube video is by Christophera. You forgot to point out the Mars face Chris..!

(IMG:http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj16/stannrodd/face1.jpg)

The tacoma narrows bridge instability.. another red herring.

This is a steel frame building of 100 floors .. impossible ?

(IMG:http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj16/stannrodd/underconstruction22mo0.png)

(IMG:http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj16/stannrodd/underconstructionhancocyt4.png)

How it looks today .. in Chicago.

(IMG:http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj16/stannrodd/250px-Hancock_tower_2006.jpg)

Chris will now probably claim that I am a disinfo internet stalker who secretly planned mass murder on 9/11 from New Zealand .. actually I came here to see if anyone had posted a scientific paper on the ability of a 767 wing to cut through the WTC perimeter columns. .. anyone? .. I couldn't find anything yet.

Saw Chris was here to so thought I'd post something.

Cheers
Stann (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/whistle.gif)

This post has been edited by stannrodd: Feb 22 2009, 11:05 PM

[dMz]

.. actually I came here to see if anyone had posted a scientific paper on the ability of a 767 wing to cut through the WTC perimeter columns. .. anyone? .. I couldn't find anything yet.

Saw Chris was here to so thought I'd post something.

Cheers
Stann (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/whistle.gif)

So I suppose the deja-vu threads would be these 2 then?

Wtc Data Faked In Conspiracy To Mislead Research, Deception and collusion void truth quest
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....showtopic=10014

Mkultra And The Post 9-11 Psyops, The possible role of a proven black ops in 9-11 disinfo
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....showtopic=13124

On the plane/fuselage vs. perimeter columns, that would probably entail computer modeled Finite Element Analysis (or FEA) (which I and GroundPounder actually considered in the Pentagon section for a while. That would require many accurate specifications from Boeing (which no one has found yet that I know of, although there were 3 pretty pictures in one of the NIST reports).

On the perimeter columns, I was doing some research on thermal modeling those (before a couple computer crashes), but my research is here:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....showtopic=13091

Posts #5 and 8 are probably the most perimeter column specific above, but see also posts 41-46 and the thread here:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10750076

I really doubt whether anyone has plans to get accurate computer modeling, as accurate, specific B767, B757, and WTC data is not even available that I have found. There appear to be 3-5 "camps" of papers on this, and I'm not convinced of the 100% validity of any that I've seen yet, as none have properly addressed mass distribution and the fraction of kinetic energy imparted into tower oscillation and/or cantilever beam bending rather than puncturing[EDIT: and/or shearing] select perimeter columns.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantilever

I discussed some of these matters with "psikeyhacker" (and a few others) a long time ago:

http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=87960&page=83

Although it doesn't focus on wings vs. P. columns, here is one of the better, more concise papers that I have read recently by David L. Griscom:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10763320

http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters...vid-griscom.pdf

At some point, the question(s) should come down to economy of resources IMHO, and I will let the various factions haggle.

Hope this helps,
d

Reason for edit: Added shearing