FEMA Deceives Nation About Twin Towers Core

[Christophera]

nothing in that clip supports a concrete core you dumbfuck
in fact it says just the opposite
wake the fuck up

he maintains the 47 STEEL COLUMNS and never said any concrete in the core

No, S. Jones says "Steel core columns", not Robertson. Meaning the September 13, 2001 article is correct which we knew, because it was never corrrected. When 3,000 die, and thhe articles info is related, it is certain a publication such as Newsweek will make sure the information is good.

wrong again asswipe
he never said concrete in the core
you LIE

You, again .......... have no evidence and deny evidence, independently verified evidence. Only an agent would do that under thees conditions. You are exposed.

Even the independent analyst brough in to try and jjustify the conclusion of collapse ended up including mention of the concrete core. Probably because they did not want to go down in history as deeply deceived and responsible for misleading the nation even further into darkness, ........ as you would see done.

Bazant even provides an equivilant amount of explosives with a description of how much work it would be to install the explosives to effect what they try to explain as collapse. Because of that and the mention of the concrete core, this was removed from the NWU server.

What Did and Did Not Cause It?
Zdenek P. Bazant 6/21/07
1
, Hon.M. ASCE, Jia-Liang Le
2
, Frank R. Greening
3
, and David B. Benson
4
Abstract: Previous analysis of progressive collapse showed that gravity alone suffices to explain the overall collapse of the World Trade Center towers. However, it has not been checked whether the allegations of controlled demolition by planted explosives have any scientific merit. The present analysis proves that they do not. The video record available for the first few seconds of collapse agrees with the motion history calculated from the differential equation of progressive collapse but disproves the free fall hypothesis (on which the aforementioned allegations rest). Although, due to absence of experimental crushing data for the lightweight concrete used, the theory of comminution cannot predict the size range of pulverized concrete particles, it is shown that the observed size range (0.01 mm – 0.1 mm) is fully consistent with this theory and is achievable by collapse driven gravity alone, and that only about 7% of the total gravitational energy converted to kinetic energy of impacts would have sufficed to pulverize all the concrete slabs and core walls (while at least 158 tons of TNT per tower, installed into many small holes drilled into each concrete floor slab and core wall, would have been needed to produce the same degree of pulverization). The exit speed of air ejected from the building by the crushing front of gravitational collapse must have attained, near the ground, 465 mph (208 m/s) on the average, and fluctuations must have reached the speed of sound. This explains loud booms and wide spreading of pulverized concrete and glass fragments, and shows that the lower margin of dust cloud could not have coincided with the crushing front. The resisting upward forces due to pulverization and air ejection, neglected in previous studies, are found to be negligible during the first few seconds of collapse but not insignificant near the end of crush-down (these forces extended the crush-down duration by about 4%; they augmented, by about 25%, the resisting force due to column buckling at the end of crush-down, and doubled that force at the beginning of crush-up). The calculated crush down duration is found to match a logical interpretation of seismic record, while the free fall duration is found to be in conflict.


http://72.14.205.104/search q=cache:H5djFQBfSzsJ:www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/b...ant&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&client=firefox-a

This is the latest paper by Bazant et al, the first one was included in the NIST report. The conclusion of collapse after stating 150 tons to TNT would be needed to effect what happened is absurd.

 

[kyzr]

This is what you had bolded:

it is shown that the observed size range (0.01 mm – 0.1 mm) is fully consistent with this theory and is achievable by collapse driven gravity alone, and that only about 7% of the total gravitational energy converted to kinetic energy of impacts would have sufficed to pulverize all the concrete slabs and core walls (while at least 158 tons of TNT per tower, installed into many small holes drilled into each concrete floor slab and core wall, would have been needed to produce the same degree of pulverization).

Lets try an English lesson. The report does NOT say "concrete slabs and CONCRETE CORE WALLS" does it? No it doesn't. It says "concrete slabs and core walls". The core walls were not concrete, they were fireproofing, closer to a very fragile plaster, which is why it pulverized so easily.. The report you cite only mentions the core walls to say how they got "pulverized". The report should have said "lightweight concrete slabs and "shaftwall" core walls" which would have been more precise language.
You can't cite one part of that report w/o accepting its main conclusion, which is that it would take 158tons of explosives to "demolish" the tower. Same conclusion as Robertson, absolutely ridiculous. The terrorists and jet impacts caused the towers to collapse.

 

[Terral]

Hi Kyzr:

You're the only one who can't understand what was built. No one else is that stupid.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtKIXmMnUc8]Kyzr And Chris Going Round And Round The Bush Inside Job[/ame]

GL,

Terral

 

[Christophera]

This is what you had bolded:

it is shown that the observed size range (0.01 mm – 0.1 mm) is fully consistent with this theory and is achievable by collapse driven gravity alone, and that only about 7% of the total gravitational energy converted to kinetic energy of impacts would have sufficed to pulverize all the concrete slabs and core walls (while at least 158 tons of TNT per tower, installed into many small holes drilled into each concrete floor slab and core wall, would have been needed to produce the same degree of pulverization).

Lets try an English lesson. The report does NOT say "concrete slabs and CONCRETE CORE WALLS" does it? No it doesn't. It says "concrete slabs and core walls". The core walls were not concrete, they were fireproofing,

Are your trying to say that Bazant was suggesting that it was necessary to drill holes and place explosives in 3" thick gypsum shaft walls that doubled as fire walls?

You have no credibility. You support secret methods of mass murder. You support the demise of the US Constitution herr kaiser.

You never answered about Newsweek and how you justify trying to suggest they had published an error.

You never provided the documentation for the towers you said were "well documented".

You never provided an image of steel core columns inthe core area on 9-11 where they would be seen IF they existed. This is an end view of the concrete core wall left of the spire. West end of WTC 1 core.

This is the statement of the lead engineer identifying a concrete core on September 13, 2001.

This is a grieving woman whose life was shattered by the murder of her loved one, of which, you attempt to keep the methods of killing secret.

 

[DiveCon]

This is what you had bolded:

it is shown that the observed size range (0.01 mm – 0.1 mm) is fully consistent with this theory and is achievable by collapse driven gravity alone, and that only about 7% of the total gravitational energy converted to kinetic energy of impacts would have sufficed to pulverize all the concrete slabs and core walls (while at least 158 tons of TNT per tower, installed into many small holes drilled into each concrete floor slab and core wall, would have been needed to produce the same degree of pulverization).

Lets try an English lesson. The report does NOT say "concrete slabs and CONCRETE CORE WALLS" does it? No it doesn't. It says "concrete slabs and core walls". The core walls were not concrete, they were fireproofing,

Are your trying to say that Bazant was suggesting that it was necessary to drill holes and place explosives in 3" thick gypsum shaft walls that doubled as fire walls?

You have no credibility. You support secret methods of mass murder. You support the demise of the US Constitution herr kaiser.

You never answered about Newsweek and how you justify trying to suggest they had published an error.

You never provided the documentation for the towers you said were "well documented".

You never provided an image of steel core columns inthe core area on 9-11 where they would be seen IF they existed. This is an end view of the concrete core wall left of the spire. West end of WTC 1 core.



This is the statement of the lead engineer identifying a concrete core on September 13, 2001.

This is a grieving woman whose life was shattered by the murder of her loved one, of which, you attempt to keep the methods of killing secret.

fuck off you disgusting pig

 

[kyzr]

Are your trying to say that Bazant was suggesting that it was necessary to drill holes and place explosives in 3" thick gypsum shaft walls that doubled as fire walls?
You have no credibility. You support secret methods of mass murder. You support the demise of the US Constitution herr kaiser.

He said "in order to pulverize" the walls and floors basically to dust particles, you'd need 158 tons of explosives. If it was reinforced concrete walls you'd need 1500 tons, and even then you'd have desk size pieces of reinforced concrete all over the place. Robertson said that the NIST report was correct. The planes caused the collapse. There was no conspiracy.

You never answered about Newsweek and how you justify trying to suggest they had published an error. You never provided the documentation for the towers you said were "well documented". You never provided an image of steel core columns inthe core area on 9-11 where they would be seen IF they existed. This is an end view of the concrete core wall left of the spire. West end of WTC 1 core.

Robertson never said anything about concrete walls in Newsweek, Nor did he or Jones mention R/C walls during the audio debate.

This is the statement of the lead engineer identifying a concrete core on.....

Listen to the audio again, they describe the structure as interior core columns and perimeter columns. No mention of concrete walls.

This is a grieving woman whose life was shattered by the murder of her loved one, of which, you attempt to keep the methods of killing secret.

No secret. Islamic terrorists killed 3,000 innocent victims on 9/11/2001 with hijacked 757 jet liners.

 

[kyzr]

I'M GOING TO KEEP POSTING THESE UNTIL YOU ANSWER ALL OF THEM


1. Robertson/Jones audio states clearly that the structure was "core columns and perimeter columns" (~18:00-19:00). Thanks!

2. Here is one more link, from "The Guardian" which should be a very neutral source of information.
World Trade Center Demolition.
No mention of concrete walls. Then you need to define what possible gain the "conspiracy" could have from lying about the concrete walls:

3. if there was a "secret method of mass murder" what was it, and why wait around for jets to hit the towers, why not just knock them down in a wind storm and kill 250,000?
<the jet impacts caused the collapses, Robertson agrees with NIST>

4. You continually fail to describe the conspiracy. Who all was supposedly involved?
<do you still cling to the "concrete wall conspiracy" or do you accept that the jets caused the collapses, and no structural concrete walls were there>

5. what difference would it make if there was a concrete core or not? If the buildings stood for ~35-years, however they were built was fine. What knocked them down if it wasn't the jet impacts? <the towers were fine until the jets hit them>

6. I can provide the equations (mathematical proof) for the deflection of the WTC tower if you have any way of verifying them.
Do you want me to post equations for the wind load and deflection with and w/o concrete walls? If I prove mathematically that the concrete couldn't possibly deflect 12' will you admit that there were no concrete walls, as everyone but you acknowledges?

No one else believes this crazy "concrete wall" conspiracy, because its so obviously wrong.

 

[Christophera]

This is what you had bolded:

it is shown that the observed size range (0.01 mm – 0.1 mm) is fully consistent with this theory and is achievable by collapse driven gravity alone, and that only about 7% of the total gravitational energy converted to kinetic energy of impacts would have sufficed to pulverize all the concrete slabs and core walls (while at least 158 tons of TNT per tower, installed into many small holes drilled into each concrete floor slab and core wall, would have been needed to produce the same degree of pulverization).

Lets try an English lesson. The report does NOT say "concrete slabs and CONCRETE CORE WALLS" does it? No it doesn't. It says "concrete slabs and core walls". The core walls were not concrete, they were fireproofing,

Are your trying to say that Bazant was suggesting that it was necessary to drill holes and place explosives in 3" thick gypsum shaft walls that doubled as fire walls?

You have no credibility. You support secret methods of mass murder. You support the demise of the US Constitution herr kaiser.

You never answered about Newsweek and how you justify trying to suggest they had published an error.

You never provided the documentation for the towers you said were "well documented".

You never provided an image of steel core columns inthe core area on 9-11 where they would be seen IF they existed. This is an end view of the concrete core wall left of the spire. West end of WTC 1 core.



This is the statement of the lead engineer identifying a concrete core on September 13, 2001.

This is a grieving woman whose life was shattered by the murder of her loved one, of which, you attempt to keep the methods of killing secret.

fuck off you disgusting pig

Awwwww, I huet is wittle feewings. Oops, dat's not even herr kaiser responding.

Only human garbage would participate in what you engage. No decency, no principles, no evidence and reason, can't recognize the violations of law.

 

[DiveCon]

Are your trying to say that Bazant was suggesting that it was necessary to drill holes and place explosives in 3" thick gypsum shaft walls that doubled as fire walls?
You have no credibility. You support secret methods of mass murder. You support the demise of the US Constitution herr kaiser.

He said "in order to pulverize" the walls and floors basically to dust particles, you'd need 158 tons of explosives. If it was reinforced concrete walls you'd need 1500 tons, and even then you'd have desk size pieces of reinforced concrete all over the place. Robertson said that the NIST report was correct. The planes caused the collapse. There was no conspiracy.

You never answered about Newsweek and how you justify trying to suggest they had published an error. You never provided the documentation for the towers you said were "well documented". You never provided an image of steel core columns inthe core area on 9-11 where they would be seen IF they existed. This is an end view of the concrete core wall left of the spire. West end of WTC 1 core.

Robertson never said anything about concrete walls in Newsweek, Nor did he or Jones mention R/C walls during the audio debate.

This is the statement of the lead engineer identifying a concrete core on.....

Listen to the audio again, they describe the structure as interior core columns and perimeter columns. No mention of concrete walls.

This is a grieving woman whose life was shattered by the murder of her loved one, of which, you attempt to keep the methods of killing secret.

No secret. Islamic terrorists killed 3,000 innocent victims on 9/11/2001 with hijacked 757 jet liners.

christophera is totally delusional, he sees concrete walls where NONE were
he also thinks he heard Mr Robertson say "concrete core" when he never did

 

[DiveCon]

Are your trying to say that Bazant was suggesting that it was necessary to drill holes and place explosives in 3" thick gypsum shaft walls that doubled as fire walls?

You have no credibility. You support secret methods of mass murder. You support the demise of the US Constitution herr kaiser.

You never answered about Newsweek and how you justify trying to suggest they had published an error.

You never provided the documentation for the towers you said were "well documented".

You never provided an image of steel core columns inthe core area on 9-11 where they would be seen IF they existed. This is an end view of the concrete core wall left of the spire. West end of WTC 1 core.



This is the statement of the lead engineer identifying a concrete core on September 13, 2001.

This is a grieving woman whose life was shattered by the murder of her loved one, of which, you attempt to keep the methods of killing secret.

fuck off you disgusting pig

Awwwww, I huet is wittle feewings. Oops, dat's not even herr kaiser responding.

Only human garbage would participate in what you engage. No decency, no principles, no evidence and reason, can't recognize the violations of law.

what YOU engage in makes YOU garbage, not even human

and you didnt hurt me one bit you fucking disgusting piece of pig shit

 

[Christophera]

People have noticed there never are any steel core columns seen in the core area.

And you won't notice that this can only be concrete.

Neither can Richard Gage.

What is misleadership and misinfo?

but you don't argue against him do you?

 

[DiveCon]

People have noticed there never are any steel core columns seen in the core area.



And you won't notice that this can only be concrete.



Neither can Richard Gage.

What is misleadership and misinfo?

but you don't argue against him do you?

he's just another fucking morn like you claiming shit that never was

btw, linking to bullshit you post on your OWN website doesnt give you ANY credibility
fucking MORON

 

[Christophera]

Oh, that is sooooooooo logical, if you support secret methods of mass murder.

The page,

FEMA misrepresented core structure of the Twin Towers.

has all the evidence exposing the deception.

 

[DiveCon]

Oh, that is sooooooooo logical, if you support secret methods of mass murder.

The page,

FEMA misrepresented core structure of the Twin Towers.

has all the evidence exposing the deception.

no, you support the terrorists by claiming THEY didnt do it
fucking asswipe

Mr Brown FAILS again

 

[Christophera]

Oh, that is sooooooooo logical, if you support secret methods of mass murder.

The page,

FEMA misrepresented core structure of the Twin Towers.

has all the evidence exposing the deception.

no, you support the terrorists by claiming THEY didnt do it
fucking asswipe

Mr Brown FAILS again

There were terrorists flying the planes, that I accept.

That FEMA presented the true core to NIST, cannot be shown. NIST themselves states they did not have plans and describe a structure never seen on 9-11 then uses a disclaimer that will allow them to use the wrong information without liability.

The structure that the lead engineer identifies on September 13, 2001 has a concrete core, which IS what is seen on 9-11.

 

[DiveCon]

Oh, that is sooooooooo logical, if you support secret methods of mass murder.

The page,

FEMA misrepresented core structure of the Twin Towers.

has all the evidence exposing the deception.

no, you support the terrorists by claiming THEY didnt do it
fucking asswipe

Mr Brown FAILS again

There were terrorists flying the planes, that I accept.

That FEMA presented the true core to NIST, cannot be shown. NIST themselves states they did not have plans and describe a structure never seen on 9-11 then uses a disclaimer that will allow them to use the wrong information without liability.

The structure that the lead engineer identifies on September 13, 2001 has a concrete core, which IS what is seen on 9-11.

THAT is a LIE
he never said any such thing
and since that has been shown to you over and over that makes YOU a liar also

 

[Christophera]

no, you support the terrorists by claiming THEY didnt do it
fucking asswipe

Mr Brown FAILS again

There were terrorists flying the planes, that I accept.

That FEMA presented the true core to NIST, cannot be shown. NIST themselves states they did not have plans and describe a structure never seen on 9-11 then uses a disclaimer that will allow them to use the wrong information without liability.

The structure that the lead engineer identifies on September 13, 2001 has a concrete core, which IS what is seen on 9-11.

THAT is a LIE
he never said any such thing
and since that has been shown to you over and over that makes YOU a liar also

Since you are unable to show then or now, it is you that lie.

Part of the FEMA deception is supported by perpetrators by digitally altering the preliminary plans made by Robertson. These are screen shots zoomed of the revision tables. No way are those things in the cells characters of the alphabet, and NO WAY are pixel straight lines and spaces possible with a scan of a pencil drawing.

 

[DiveCon]

There were terrorists flying the planes, that I accept.

That FEMA presented the true core to NIST, cannot be shown. NIST themselves states they did not have plans and describe a structure never seen on 9-11 then uses a disclaimer that will allow them to use the wrong information without liability.

The structure that the lead engineer identifies on September 13, 2001 has a concrete core, which IS what is seen on 9-11.

THAT is a LIE
he never said any such thing
and since that has been shown to you over and over that makes YOU a liar also

Since you are unable to show then or now, it is you that lie.

Part of the FEMA deception is supported by perpetrators by digitally altering the preliminary plans made by Robertson. These are screen shots zoomed of the revision tables. No way are those things in the cells characters of the alphabet, and NO WAY are pixel straight lines and spaces possible with a scan of a pencil drawing.

and not one of those images changes a fucking thing in how the building was constricted, it was WELL DOCUMENTED BEFORE 9/11

thats why you come off as so fucking moronic
it was WELL KNOWN the core was STEEL COLUMNS
and not concrete
as i have said MANY times before, it was a SELLING POINT for the buildings when they first OPENED
but you are too fucking delusional to understand that

and not even the rest of the 9/11 troofer fuckheads agree with you because you come off as even MORE delusional than they are

 

[Christophera]

THAT is a LIE
he never said any such thing
and since that has been shown to you over and over that makes YOU a liar also

Since you are unable to show then or now, it is you that lie.

Part of the FEMA deception is supported by perpetrators by digitally altering the preliminary plans made by Robertson. These are screen shots zoomed of the revision tables. No way are those things in the cells characters of the alphabet, and NO WAY are pixel straight lines and spaces possible with a scan of a pencil drawing.

and not one of those images changes a fucking thing in how the building was constricted, it was WELL DOCUMENTED BEFORE 9/11

Prove that.

 

[DiveCon]

Since you are unable to show then or now, it is you that lie.

Part of the FEMA deception is supported by perpetrators by digitally altering the preliminary plans made by Robertson. These are screen shots zoomed of the revision tables. No way are those things in the cells characters of the alphabet, and NO WAY are pixel straight lines and spaces possible with a scan of a pencil drawing.

and not one of those images changes a fucking thing in how the building was constricted, it was WELL DOCUMENTED BEFORE 9/11

Prove that.

i already did you fucking MORON
you can buy BOOKS on it published back in 1977
i already gave you a link once, not going to do it again because it is a waste of time to give you anything because you are too fucking stupid