IPB




POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Fema Lied About The Towers Core - Demolition, The Towers were built to demolish

Christophera
post Nov 15 2007, 01:15 AM
Post #1





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 494
Joined: 14-November 07
Member No.: 2,482



I understand that many here are probably many very invested in the FEMA deception about the towers core or that there were multiple steel core columns inside the core area or other information describing that core. It is a bummer being deceived, but please don't be angry with me, be angry with FEMA or the quasi leadership of the truth movement because I've been telling them for years and they believe FEMA without question.

Here is the only official diagram of the core I know of which has any real detail. It is pure fiction.



Here is what the core of WTC 2 looks like at 1/2 the total height. All of the exterior steel framework has fallen away. There is no way what you see below represents the structure depicted above.



What is seen in the image of 9-11 is a steel reinforced, rectangular tubular, cast concrete core.

I've posted links to a video, in the VIDEO thread, I've produced that merges the 9-11 images with other information to show the core deception and illustrate the demolition methods. My background and the basic source for this information is also there.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum...opic=3940&st=15

The fact is that the images of the towers coming down on 9-11 DO NOT show any of the core features that FEMA states existed or what other sources show.

Realize the Guiliani took the plans from the NYC city offices in December of '01 for a reason. Realize that cheney was appointed as director of FEMA for a reason one week after gwb was selected in 2000.

Here is an independent and highly qualified source who has published a PDF which indicates a concrete core.

http://www.ncsea.com/downloads/wtcseerp.pdf
August Domel, Jr., Ph.D., S.E., P.E. November 2001

Groundbreaking for construction of the World Trade Center took place on August 5, 1966 Tower One, standing 1368 feet high, was completed in 1970, and Tower Two, at 1362 feet high, was completed in 1972. The structural design for the World Trade Center Towers was done by Skilling, Helle, Christiansen and Robertson. It was designed as a tube building that included a perimeter moment-resisting frame consisting of steel columns spaced on 39-inch centers. The load carrying system was designed so that the steel facade would resist lateral and gravity forces and the interior concrete core would carry only gravity loads.

Dr. Domel received a Ph.D. from the University of Illinois at Chicago in 1988 and a Law Degree from Loyola University in 1992. He is a licensed Structural Engineer and Attorney at Law in the .State of Illinois and a Professional Engineer in twelve states, including the State of New York. Dr. Domel is authorized by the Department of Labor (OSHA) as a 10 and 30 hour construction safety trainer.


Leslie E. Robertson was interviewed and provided information to Katherine Stroup of Newsweek stating there was a concrete core on September 13, '01.

http://web.archive.org/web/20040807085840/http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3069641/
Leslie Robertson, Architect Of The World Trade Center Towers

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.


The leaked plans of WTC 1 from Silverstein have been faked to appear as heavily reviewed construction drawings. The drawings were actually preliminary plans by Robertson which were given to Minoru Yamasaki who rejected the steel core columns because they have too much flex. He would not certify the structure as safe with steel core columns.
The faking was done by adding revision tables to the scans of blueprints. The resolution was also degraded so that dimensions would not be readable making it possible for the original ID of the core could be obliterated from common knowledge. The basic ID was 80x120 feet, from the 43rd up. Lower was a couple of extra feet for conduit and plumbing or ducts.
Here is what the altered revision tables show which proves the plans as fake. Does anyone recognize those character as of the alphabet? Do you realize that it is about impossible to have a pencil line resolve with that many pixels in a straight line from a scan? (from A-A-141.tif)



I have a page documenting this analysis.

http://algoxy.com/psych/whatis9-11Disinfo_fakeplan.html

Here is my 9-11 site.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html

There are 3 hours of audio interviews downloadable here,

http://www.breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2854

Where there are images which have been coordinated with the edited interviews by Fintan Dunne of breakfornews.com

The method of demolition was that the towers were built with C4 plastic explosive cast into the concrete in 2 basic explosive circuits. The rebar of the concrete shear walls of the tubular cast concrete core was one circuit and each panel of every floor comprised the other circuit.

All that need to be done was the setting of detonators by digging our paraffin plugs sealing and preserving the C4 where blasting caps were placed. Digital counters were wired into redundant security telephone circuit that ran throughout the towers. One audio tone on that circuit set the digital counter counting and each floor was timed for 75 seconds more delay descending and every 40 foot of core followed the floors down at a rate of free fall.

The core detonation circuits were inside the core and protected by the blasts of the floors by the thick core walls.

The US government has been infiltrated since about 1950 and secret elements have controlled the intelligence agencies from shortly after that time.

This post has been edited by Christophera: Nov 15 2007, 01:18 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Factfinder Gener...
post Nov 15 2007, 04:11 PM
Post #2





Group: Newbie
Posts: 743
Joined: 23-August 07
Member No.: 1,808



Hi, Christophera.

How do you account for the vaporization of steel that took place? What about the thousands of filing cabinets missing from the rubble?

I have more questions but that should get us started.

This post has been edited by Factfinder General: Nov 15 2007, 05:47 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
painter
post Nov 15 2007, 05:03 PM
Post #3


∞* M E R C U R I A L *∞


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 5,870
Joined: 25-August 06
From: SFO
Member No.: 16



Christophera, unless I'm mistaken, you were banned months ago.

Go away.

Locking
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
grizz
post Nov 15 2007, 05:51 PM
Post #4


aka Oceans Flow


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,211
Joined: 19-October 06
From: Oregon
Member No.: 108



I'm moving all his threads to AT.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Carl Bank
post Nov 15 2007, 05:53 PM
Post #5





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,114
Joined: 21-October 06
From: Berlin
Member No.: 121



Just unlocking for a moment to ask Chris if he ever dropped
by at the Forum of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth?

I bet you'll get all answers and responses over there and also
get a better insight into the WTC problematic.

As this is Pilots for 9/11 Truth, we certainly have a lot of members
with well half baked basic knowledge about building engeneering,
but I never found anyone here who claimed to know scientificly
what went on on 9/11 with he WTC. We just collect well backed
up facts from real experts on this subject and try to understand it
for ourself.

Don't worry about painter's reaction. I for one don't remember your
name or that you were banned, but painter isn't just an average joe
on this board and his word has a weight and value for all of us.

So: Good luck in seeking the truth... over at ae911truth.org


locking again: Carl

EDIT / not locking again after OF's move to AT: Carl

This post has been edited by Carl Bank: Nov 15 2007, 05:54 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Christophera
post Nov 16 2007, 01:54 PM
Post #6





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 494
Joined: 14-November 07
Member No.: 2,482



QUOTE (Carl Bank @ Nov 15 2007, 04:53 PM)
So: Good luck in seeking the truth... over at ae911truth.org


locking again: Carl

EDIT / not locking again after OF's move to AT: Carl

As I've said in the other thread. ae911truth.org has banned me. Prior to that the place was fairly dead. stj911 is the same way. They have no explanations for anything. It is all a giant mystery. All they do is repeat the same data and observations with a note of new sensation added in here and there to appear active.

There are explanations for these things but only with a concrete core in the built to demolish situation.

free fall
total pulverization
superfine, heated particulate
smooth, square cut column ends x the 1,000's
heavy steel assemblies heaved hundreds of feet

The last 50 years of America has been one big lie. If we are to have a future we are going to have to deal with the fact and assimilate the truth.

Notice the url to my web site.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html

9-11scenario.html is in a directory titled /psych/ for a reason. America has a extremely deep psychological problem dealing with secrecy. I mean EXTREME, thousands have died and we are still not over it. Basically, we are ready to give up everything to avoid the truth about secrecy.

The concrete core is not the issue here. The issue is that IF we are to acknowledge the concrete core we have to acknowledge the built to demolish aspect, IF we do that we have to address the secrecy issue. Ooops, there's that psychological problem.

It is called DISSOCIATION. Another appropriate word is REPRESSION. America has spent so much time in a state of dissociation and been so involved with repression that the even the thought of undoing or reversing that causes us to have cognitive failures. Those faiures manifest in many ways, none of them functional if 9-11 truth is the goal.

The banning, locking, failures to acknowledge evidence and reports of disinterested authority are all about CONTINUING the dissociation and repression of information regarding the creation and maintenance of secrecy. It is unconscious with each and every one of YOU and it was with ME, until I fully realized what it was causing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Factfinder Gener...
post Nov 16 2007, 04:20 PM
Post #7





Group: Newbie
Posts: 743
Joined: 23-August 07
Member No.: 1,808



QUOTE (Factfinder General @ Nov 15 2007, 03:11 PM)
Hi, Christophera.

How do you account for the vaporization of steel that took place? What about the thousands of filing cabinets missing from the rubble?

I have more questions but that should get us started.

Repeating my questions which seem to have gone unanswered.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
grizz
post Nov 16 2007, 04:27 PM
Post #8


aka Oceans Flow


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,211
Joined: 19-October 06
From: Oregon
Member No.: 108



If the core was concrete and not steel, then where did all the girders in the rubble come from?

Would a concrete core be flexible enough to maintain the structural integrity of such a tall building?

The blueprints show girders, not concrete. What about the steel-framed core that we see in construction photos?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Factfinder Gener...
post Nov 16 2007, 05:05 PM
Post #9





Group: Newbie
Posts: 743
Joined: 23-August 07
Member No.: 1,808



QUOTE (Oceans Flow @ Nov 16 2007, 03:27 PM)
If the core was concrete and not steel, then where did all the girders in the rubble come from?

Would a concrete core be flexible enough to maintain the structural integrity of such a tall building?

The blueprints show girders, not concrete.  What about the steel-framed core that we see in construction photos?

The core seems to have been constructed from steel AND concrete:

QUOTE (Oxford University. Published 1992)
Modern skyscrapers, such as the World Trade Center, New York, have steel and concrete hull-and-core structures.  The central core, a reinforced concrete tower, contains lift shafts, staircases and vertical ducts.  From this core, the concrete and steel composite floors span on to a steel perimeter structure: a lightweight aluminum and glass curtain wall encloses the building.

So, we are talking about the Towers being constructed with a vertical steel and concrete core.

This DOES seem to have been covered up which is of great interest.

Here's a possible reason for such a cover up, as an alternative/adjunctive to Christophera's C4 laced, self-destructing concrete theory:

No plane parts would pass through a massive reinforced concrete and steel core. There could be NO remotely feasible penetration of this vertical core, i.e. the perps could push the lie that the planes could have entirely penetrated the outer perimeter, thus accessing the (falsely described) hollow core interior of the building, but to extend this to the planes being able to penetrate a steel AND concrete core would have been pushing credibility too far.

In other words the "Concrete Core" evidence supports "No Plane Theory" (NPT). The notion that there was NO concrete aspect to the core can thus clearly be seen to be a very necessary lie and I suspect that it was introduced to support "Real Plane Theory" (RPT): at least in large part.

This post has been edited by Factfinder General: Nov 16 2007, 05:29 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Christophera
post Nov 16 2007, 05:39 PM
Post #10





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 494
Joined: 14-November 07
Member No.: 2,482



QUOTE (Oceans Flow @ Nov 16 2007, 03:27 PM)
If the core was concrete and not steel, then where did all the girders in the rubble come from?

Would a concrete core be flexible enough to maintain the structural integrity of such a tall building?

The blueprints show girders, not concrete.  What about the steel-framed core that we see in construction photos?

The towers were 2 systems. The exterior steel framework was the primary load bearing structure.

The steel reinforced cast concrete tubular core kep the exterior steel aligned so that it could bear maximum loads.

The Tacoma narrows bridge was a leeson in the flex of steel. The 6000 foot long span 40 feet wide began oscillating in a 42 MPH wind whic took it out. A bridge is fastened at both ends. the towers, with their dimensions werefastened at one end with 208 foot wide faces and winds of 120 MPH were what was designed for.

The documentary, "The Engineering and Construction of the Twin Towers" showed film of Yamasaki's scale model, tempered steel and everything, in a wind tunnel and made statements that Yamasaki's calculations showed the tower would not take the wind without oscillating torsions, the same thing that took out the bridge. The wind tunel test bore out the calc's and deformations that were excessive of tolerances began to show at 85 MPH wind.

Concrete flexes when reinforceing stel is added. High tensile steel rebar was Robertsons contribution after his preliminary design was shot down by Yamasaki. The high tensile steel reduced the thickness of the walls at the base to make the loss of floor space at lobby level acceptable.

The preliminary plans are what Silversteins employee "leaked".

http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/wt...istleblower.htm

And they were digitally altered after scanning by te addition of revision tables from another, unknown set. Here is a zoom of the revision table from AA.141.tiff. Note, the character seen are not of the alphbet and that the pixilations for the distnaces seen are not possible from a pencil scanned drawing.



They also had the resolution destroyed so that dimensions could not be read. This PROVES a conspriracy to decieve the truth movement.

This post has been edited by Christophera: Nov 16 2007, 05:40 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
behind
post Nov 16 2007, 05:45 PM
Post #11





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 388
Joined: 25-August 06
Member No.: 13



About the core, then in my opinion it is pretty strange that officially (Fema, Nist etc) there was no concrete in the core. Nothing.

It have alway been difficult for me to buy that. But I am no expert... but for me it is not so hard to belive that there was some concrete in or around the core.

But about Christophers "concrete core" theory... I am open minded. In my opinion it is interesting theory. And c-4 ... um...I am more skeptical about that idea.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Christophera
post Nov 16 2007, 05:47 PM
Post #12





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 494
Joined: 14-November 07
Member No.: 2,482



QUOTE (Factfinder General @ Nov 16 2007, 04:05 PM)
QUOTE (Oceans Flow @ Nov 16 2007, 03:27 PM)
If the core was concrete and not steel, then where did all the girders in the rubble come from?

Would a concrete core be flexible enough to maintain the structural integrity of such a tall building?

The blueprints show girders, not concrete.  What about the steel-framed core that we see in construction photos?

The core seems to have been constructed from steel AND concrete:

QUOTE (Oxford University. Published 1992)
Modern skyscrapers, such as the World Trade Center, New York, have steel and concrete hull-and-core structures.  The central core, a reinforced concrete tower, contains lift shafts, staircases and vertical ducts.  From this core, the concrete and steel composite floors span on to a steel perimeter structure: a lightweight aluminum and glass curtain wall encloses the building.

So, we are talking about the Towers being constructed with a vertical steel and concrete core.

This DOES seem to have been covered up which is of great interest.

Here's a possible reason for such a cover up, as an alternative/adjunctive to Christophera's C4 laced, self-destructing concrete theory:

No plane parts would pass through a massive reinforced concrete and steel core. There could be NO remotely feasible penetration of this vertical core, i.e. the perps could push the lie that the planes could have entirely penetrated the outer perimeter, thus accessing the (falsely described) hollow core interior of the building, but to extend this to the planes being able to penetrate a steel AND concrete core would have been pushing credibility too far.

In other words the "Concrete Core" evidence supports "No Plane Theory" (NPT). The notion that there was NO concrete aspect to the core can thus clearly be seen to be a very necessary lie and I suspect that it was introduced to support "Real Plane Theory" (RPT): at least in large part.

The right engine of flight 11 penetrated both sides of the towers core.



The left engine of flight 175 penetrated 2 walls of the concrete core.



In both cases the farside perimeter steel box columns stopped the engines from exiting the towers.

The WTC 2 animated .gif is in error, otherwise they are remarkably accurate.

The WTC 2 engines trajectory, in the horizontal and vertical planes matches with a dust explosion out of the east face of the tower which coincides with the timing of the fireball, just ahead of it. This factor was thought to be evidence of a missile on "Lets Roll" about 4 years ago. Using the preceding gifs and stills of the east face and impact elevations I was able to project the exit point of the engine, if it would have exited, and it coincides with the dust blast and debunked the nonsense missile "theory". Jayhan probably hasn't totally forgiven me for that. Stanrodd the mod is gatekeeping on the concrete core issue and I don't post there anymore.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Christophera
post Nov 16 2007, 05:50 PM
Post #13





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 494
Joined: 14-November 07
Member No.: 2,482



QUOTE (Factfinder General @ Nov 16 2007, 03:20 PM)
QUOTE (Factfinder General @ Nov 15 2007, 03:11 PM)
Hi, Christophera.

How do you account for the vaporization of steel that took place?  What about the thousands of filing cabinets missing from the rubble?

I have more questions but that should get us started.

Repeating my questions which seem to have gone unanswered.

Blame painter.

I was answering when I discovered that the thread was locked, but save it for you.

THE POST I WAS TRYING TO MAKE:
Greetings Factfinder,

As a welder for 35 years the smooth, square cut columns are one of the biggest mysteries of ground zero evidence. This image which shows the interior box columns of one side, they were fastened to the outside of the concrete shear wall wih an appropriate surchage loading schedule to account for the compression of steel.





The fact that they are all cut on a level plane and square, with a cut that appears like this in a closeup,



Indicates that some very high performance cutting charges were employed. The word "vaporization" perhaps goes too far. Particularization is fairly well proven. The term "microspheres" is appropriate. Dust analysis shows iron bonded to calcium, silica and other concrete based materials, chromium also shows up.

The precense of molten steel in the basement could produce many vapors, but since it was all shipped overseas, the line of research cannot be followed reasonably.

Given this image,



and the top image withit's curious striations in the dark particle cloud above and to the rear, and the fact that the interior box columns went far up into the tower coupled with the evidence showing columns cut on level lines, the only comprehensive conclusion is that he floors had optimized cutting charges built into the floors. There is also other evidence for this.

The containment possible in a plane, focusing a collapsing plane of high pressure gasses, which slice through the column walls and the exhaust out the open tops of columns not yet fallen, provides about the only explanation for all of the factors.

As far as pulverization. The maximum pressures possible by near perfect containment of high explosives that could be built into engineered concrete containers would do 2 things needed to shred sheet metal file cabinets and other objects inside the buildings. 1.) Break the concrete into its particulate components with a maximized shock wave. 2.)Accelerate the particulate to speeds of 7 miles per second for a short distance after reducing them to base components.

This post has been edited by Christophera: Nov 16 2007, 05:51 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
grizz
post Nov 16 2007, 06:15 PM
Post #14


aka Oceans Flow


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,211
Joined: 19-October 06
From: Oregon
Member No.: 108











Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
grizz
post Nov 16 2007, 06:16 PM
Post #15


aka Oceans Flow


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,211
Joined: 19-October 06
From: Oregon
Member No.: 108



I'm done now. nonono.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Factfinder Gener...
post Nov 16 2007, 06:35 PM
Post #16





Group: Newbie
Posts: 743
Joined: 23-August 07
Member No.: 1,808



QUOTE (Christophera @ Nov 16 2007, 04:47 PM)
QUOTE (Factfinder General @ Nov 16 2007, 04:05 PM)
The core seems to have been constructed from steel AND concrete:

QUOTE (Oxford University. Published 1992)
Modern skyscrapers, such as the World Trade Center, New York, have steel and concrete hull-and-core structures.  The central core, a reinforced concrete tower, contains lift shafts, staircases and vertical ducts.  From this core, the concrete and steel composite floors span on to a steel perimeter structure: a lightweight aluminum and glass curtain wall encloses the building.

So, we are talking about the Towers being constructed with a vertical steel and concrete core.

This DOES seem to have been covered up which is of great interest.

Here's a possible reason for such a cover up, as an alternative/adjunctive to Christophera's C4 laced, self-destructing concrete theory:

No plane parts would pass through a massive reinforced concrete and steel core. There could be NO remotely feasible penetration of this vertical core, i.e. the perps could push the lie that the planes could have entirely penetrated the outer perimeter, thus accessing the (falsely described) hollow core interior of the building, but to extend this to the planes being able to penetrate a steel AND concrete core would have been pushing credibility too far.

In other words the "Concrete Core" evidence supports "No Plane Theory" (NPT). The notion that there was NO concrete aspect to the core can thus clearly be seen to be a very necessary lie and I suspect that it was introduced to support "Real Plane Theory" (RPT): at least in large part.

The right engine of flight 11 penetrated both sides of the towers core.



The left engine of flight 175 penetrated 2 walls of the concrete core.



In both cases the farside perimeter steel box columns stopped the engines from exiting the towers.

The WTC 2 animated .gif is in error, otherwise they are remarkably accurate.

The WTC 2 engines trajectory, in the horizontal and vertical planes matches with a dust explosion out of the east face of the tower which coincides with the timing of the fireball, just ahead of it. This factor was thought to be evidence of a missile on "Lets Roll" about 4 years ago. Using the preceding gifs and stills of the east face and impact elevations I was able to project the exit point of the engine, if it would have exited, and it coincides with the dust blast and debunked the nonsense missile "theory". Jayhan probably hasn't totally forgiven me for that. Stanrodd the mod is gatekeeping on the concrete core issue and I don't post there anymore.

I am totally persuaded by your evidence for a steel AND concrete core and I thank you for bringing this important piece of 9/11 evidence to my attention. salute.gif

The official story depends on NO Concrete aspect to the core for this reason (and I suspect that it may be the MAIN reason for the "concrete core cover up"). The planes would categorically NOT have been able to explode inside the towers in the way depicted, if the core was concrete and steel.

Quite simply, your evidence completely and utterly proves that the videos of the event have been modified.

Firstly, look at the gifs you posted and note that the alleged plane material easily accesses and passes through the interior of the towers' central areas which are depicted as largely hollow and not as a massive steel and concrete tube.

Here's the official diagram of exiting building debris from the alleged planes following the impact and explosion.



Here's the official plan diagrams of the behavior of the alleged planes upon impact with the WTC towers:









Here's the Purdue simulation of the WTC2 impact event as based on the video evidence:

Purdue Simulation

From reviewing this material it should be evident that the official reports of (1) the behavior of the alleged planes and the resulting explosions and (2) the alleged damage these explosions caused to the Towers' interiors, are totally dependent on there being no concrete aspect to the core. Your evidence thoroughly debunks these official reports.

This is hugely significant, Christophera.

With the presentation of your evidence relating to the cores' concrete aspect, you have affirmed, in the strongest way, that the airplanes seen in the videos of the event are totally bogus! The alleged planes could not have caused the resultant explosions; even if the planes could have penetrated the outer perimeter (and they could NOT have - see my other threads) the massive vertical steel and concrete cores would have totally prevented the exit blasts (as evidenced in the videos) from occurring. These exit blasts can only have occurred in the manner depicted and in accordance with the official reports, if the alleged planes were able to penetrate through to the central area of the towers before exploding. Your evidence clearly renders this to be an impossibility!

Now moving on to the theoretical part of your presentation regarding the mechanisms behind the Towers' demolitions...

This post has been edited by Factfinder General: Nov 16 2007, 07:00 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
grizz
post Nov 16 2007, 06:43 PM
Post #17


aka Oceans Flow


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,211
Joined: 19-October 06
From: Oregon
Member No.: 108



Once again. Look closely.



Transparent concrete. What will they think of next. rolleyes.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Christophera
post Nov 16 2007, 07:14 PM
Post #18





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 494
Joined: 14-November 07
Member No.: 2,482



QUOTE (Oceans Flow @ Nov 16 2007, 05:43 PM)
Once again.  Look closely.



Transparent concrete.  What will they think of next. rolleyes.gif

Do we see steel core columns? No.

That image does not look directly down the hallways of WTC 1 and what we see is reflected light off the inside of the concrete core. The inner forms were steel breakdown forms left a very smooth surface that will reflect obique light.

This image shows the taper between the interior box columns and the core of WTC 1 on the right.



with the single hallway crossing the narrow axis of the core. WTC 2 on the left shows it's 2 hallways. Note. No core columns. If there were columns the towers would be almost transparent in the core area.

WTC 2 was built quite different and parts of the core or single walls were cast independent of the entire core which provided resistence against torsion meaning the steel could be advanced further than WTC 1 which was limited to 7 floors of steel over the top of the concrete pour. WTC 2 had no taper from the 43rd floor up. It was a combined shearwall/cell design that used a third wall crossing the short axis in the middle where as WTC 1 was a simple rectangular tube with strict shear wall design and a taper to the outside wall of the core. Quite difficult to construct compared to WTC 2.

The most important and revealing thing is that an image such as this one shows nothing in the core whatsoever.



What is seen is rebar. That is about 50 pieces of 3 inch rebar which sat exposed to winter weather during constrcution and the explosive lost its viability. Before this was detected the concrete was cast. Fresh coated horizontal rebar was tied to it which detonated and removed the concrete leaving the heavy vertical bar to stand freely.

That rebar image is immediately after this one,



Which shows the spire which can be located as outside the core inthe northwest corner of the exterior steel framework.



This post has been edited by Christophera: Nov 16 2007, 07:20 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Factfinder Gener...
post Nov 16 2007, 07:26 PM
Post #19





Group: Newbie
Posts: 743
Joined: 23-August 07
Member No.: 1,808



QUOTE (Christophera @ Nov 16 2007, 06:14 PM)
That image does not look directly down the hallways of WTC 1 and what we see is reflected light off the inside of the concrete core.  The inner forms were steel breakdown forms left a very smooth surface that will reflect obique light.

From the evidence submitted, and I am most persuaded by the contempory reports of a concrete and steel core found within various journals, I am convinced there was a concrete aspect to the cores. This does seem to have been covered up.

Note: As I understand it, Christophera is not disputing the existence of steel core columns, just the fact that they comprised the whole of the core structure.

I believe this "vertical steel and concrete core" evidence to be of huge significance, though Christophera and I may have some difference of opinion as to the nature of this significance. (As I said before, I intend to fully discuss the theory of WTC self destructing concrete as things proceed here.)

salute.gif

This post has been edited by Factfinder General: Nov 16 2007, 07:33 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Christophera
post Nov 16 2007, 07:40 PM
Post #20





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 494
Joined: 14-November 07
Member No.: 2,482



QUOTE (Factfinder General @ Nov 16 2007, 06:26 PM)
QUOTE (Christophera @ Nov 16 2007, 06:14 PM)
That image does not look directly down the hallways of WTC 1 and what we see is reflected light off the inside of the concrete core.  The inner forms were steel breakdown forms left a very smooth surface that will reflect obique light.

From the evidence submitted, and I am most persuaded by the contempory reports of a concrete and steel core found within various journals, I am convinced there was a concrete aspect to the cores. This does seem to have been covered up.

I believe this to be of huge significance, though Christophera and I may have some difference of opinion as to the nature of this significance. (As I said before, I intend to fully discuss the theory of WTC self destructing concrete as things proceed here.)

salute.gif

Good thinking and uses of reasons and evidence.

We will find that all of the steel inside the core area was elevator guide rail support steel and had no structural qualities.

The key aspect is gaining more corroboraton of this so we can escalate our uses of the information to stop what is happening in and to our nation.

The video documentary "The Engineering and Construction of the Twin Towers" is critical to find. I'm quite certain that there are hundreds if not over a thousand copies of the 2 hour video in Americas closets and on the shelves of video collections. For 5 years I've been trying to get the truth movement to mount a search for it via its many websites and whatever publicity can be gained. What has happened is I have met with endless ridicule, message board bannings meaning that the movement has now been psychologically turned against this information.

This is the largest problem we confront.

I have found no less that 6 people who saw a video having images of the concrete core being constructed. At least 2 other productions used video clips in them. The problem is that NONE of those people was a part of the truth movement. And none knew that FEMA presents a tower with steel core columns. As soon as I tell them they are afraid to use what they know to help. It sucks.

This post has been edited by Christophera: Nov 16 2007, 10:40 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd April 2014 - 07:48 AM