FEMA Deceives Nation About Twin Towers Core

[Christophera]

Finally you revised your statements into questions that can be asked. Mostly off topic but easily answered. Unlike my questions of you, which you cannot reasonably answer.

I'M GOING TO KEEP POSTING THESE UNTIL YOU ANSWER ALL OF THEM, ONE BY ONE WITH NUMBERED ANSWERS

1. Robertson/Jones audio states clearly that the structure was "core columns and perimeter columns" (~18:00-19:00). Thanks! <this question was resolved. only steel columns were "structure">
http://www.imploded.org/BOMBED/s_jones_robertson_061026.mp3

Wrong, Newsweek clearly states,

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.

and the information comes from Robertson. You have failed to answer if you think Robertson did not request a correction if the info is wrong, or if Newsweek refused to correct. You, ........ are not accountable. The radio discussion has been edited and JONES identifies steel core columns.

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:

Fire would never be a cause of collapse in a tower with a concrete structural core. Dumbed down and divided America is expected to accept steel core columns because of cognitive distortions used in presentation. There was fire, steel does bend when it is heated. We know how dumb the perps want Americans to be and assist them to assume that small fires on a few floors could heat the entire steel structure as if Allahs great torch from hell came from the ground and raised it all uniformly to that temperature at one moment to cause a free fall collapse. No way, even in hell.

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>

This thread is not about what brought the towers down, it is about what was brought down, the towers themselves. The towers survived 3, 110mph winds, and they were designed for 120mph, while probably capable of surviving 140mph because the method of construction was so good. The concrete tubular core kept the steel perfectly aligned in its maximum load bearing position. The hat truss was bearing on the top of the concrete tube which absolutely made the moment frames and transfer of sway into compression loads optimized. Moment frames and that transfer with that mechanism do not work well all in the same material because that which is trying to resist the flex, flexes as much as that which it is trying to brace and stiffen. The core resisted torsion supremely, so oscillation was gone.

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>

Off topic, except for the deception. FEMA, guiliani were involved as well as a few other unidentified actors.

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>

They were also fine until the sunlight of September 11, 2001 hit them. Off topic herr kaiser.

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?

Are you competing with divot for how much BS you can assert? Not a question herr kaiser.

7. Army demolition experts would be needed to carry about 158 tons of explosives into the WTC Towers and Building-7, then they would need to remove the architectural coverings to expose the steel columns and floor trusses, set large packs of explosives, and then string miles of wire to some type of detonator. ALL UNNOTICED BY THE OCCUPANTS AND BUILDING SECURITY. HOW STUPID IS THIS THEORY??

Off topic herr kaiser. First determine WHAT KIND of building it was, then decide how much of what gets hauled in.

8. If Army guys wouldn't rig the WTC for super secret demolition then Bush or Cheney would need to sneak SNs into the country to rig the explosives into the WTC AND AGAIN BE UNNOTICED. Is this your "secret method"?

Again, off topic and the type of structure that stood WILL control what is brought in and how it is placed to achieve what was done. First things first, .......... herr kaiser.

The core was a concrete tube, and this is the east wall of WTC 1's core falling into the empty core area.

 

[kyzr]

1. Robertson/Jones audio states clearly that the structure was "core columns and perimeter columns" (~18:00-19:00). Thanks! <this question was resolved. only steel columns were "structure">
http://www.imploded.org/BOMBED/s_jones_robertson_061026.mp3

Wrong, Newsweek clearly states,
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.

and the information comes from Robertson. You have failed to answer if you think Robertson did not request a correction if the info is wrong, or if Newsweek refused to correct. You, ........ are not accountable. The radio discussion has been edited and JONES identifies steel core columns.

1. Newsweek was clearly wrong, unless they misinterpreted the fireproof "shaftwalls" as concrete.
2. We can resolve this with a quick email to Mr. Robertson. That would either confirm or end the "disappearing concrete wall" conspiracy. Just ask him if the core had structural concrete walls or not.
3. The conspiracy would need better proof of concrete walls than a misprint in Newsweek.
4. You need to show the remnants of wall on the ground, there would be 12 miles of wall that you don't see lying on the ground.
5. I provided several independent sources that show the towers did not have concrete core
walls. (FEMA, NIST, Robertson, Guardian, and photos that don't show R/C walls on the ground) You need to show several sources of the reinforced concrete walls at least 3' thick on drawings and on the ground. You never show any concrete wall pieces on the ground.

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:

2. Fire would never be a cause of collapse in a tower with a concrete structural core. Dumbed down and divided America is expected to accept steel core columns because of cognitive distortions used in presentation. There was fire, steel does bend when it is heated. We know how dumb the perps want Americans to be and assist them to assume that small fires on a few floors could heat the entire steel structure as if Allahs great torch from hell came from the ground and raised it all uniformly to that temperature at one moment to cause a free fall collapse. No way, even in hell.

I provided a link, from "The Guardian" which is very neutral source of information. No mention of concrete walls. Then you need to define what possible gain the "conspiracy" could have from lying about the concrete walls: One guardian article should equal one Newsweek misprint. As for the "small fire" did you see the fireball at impact" There were hundreds of thousands of gallons of jet fuel in the jets that created massive fire, plus the jet impact knocked the fireproofing of the steel. so you have a massive fire and no fireproofing, the towers collapsed exactly as predicted by the NIST engineers.
Plus, part-B of the question:
what possible gain would a conspiracy have to say that there were or were not concrete walls? The conspiracy makes no sense, just ask Mr. Robertson.

3. This thread is not about what brought the towers down, it is about what was brought down, the towers themselves. The towers survived 3, 110mph winds, and they were designed for 120mph, while probably capable of surviving 140mph because the method of construction was so good. The concrete tubular core kept the steel perfectly aligned in its maximum load bearing position. The hat truss was bearing on the top of the concrete tube which absolutely made the moment frames and transfer of sway into compression loads optimized. Moment frames and that transfer with that mechanism do not work well all in the same material because that which is trying to resist the flex, flexes as much as that which it is trying to brace and stiffen. The core resisted torsion supremely, so oscillation was gone.

3. So you agree that there was no "secret method of mass murder" ? If not, you need to say what it was.

Off topic, except for the deception. FEMA, guiliani were involved as well as a few other unidentified actors.

4. You continually fail to describe the conspiracy. Who all was supposedly involved?
The towers were built way before Rudy came to NY. He had nothing to gain from the tower design. Even Silverstein had nothing to gain/lose. The buildings were insured. The insurance companies would be all over any "wall conspiracy". The Port Authority also has all the tower design info, so you need to see that there were way too many people involved to cover anything up.

They were also fine until the sunlight of September 11, 2001 hit them. Off topic herr kaiser.

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.
We agree the jets knocked them down. If the jets didn't hit them the design was fine. I don't see where the "wall conspiracy" came from. There were no concrete walls in the original design. If you want to put up your proofs on one post, I'll put up my posts on the reply. We'll see which would stand up in court. I'll start a new thread with a poll to see who believes which evidence more.

6. Are you competing with divot for how much BS you can assert? Not a question herr kaiser.

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?
Its engineering proof that the documented sway the towers experienced could not happen if concrete walls were present. Steel columns sway, concrete core walls don't. Thats engineering, not bullshit. Your conspiracy is bullshit.

7. Off topic herr kaiser. First determine WHAT KIND of building it was, then decide how much of what gets hauled in.

Agreed. There was no controlled demolition. We agree the jets brought the towers down.

8. Again, off topic and the type of structure that stood WILL control what is brought in and how it is placed to achieve what was done. First things first, .......... herr kaiser.

agreed. No controlled demolition.

The core was a concrete tube, and this is the east wall of WTC 1's core falling into the empty core area.

We got the question list from 8 to 6, thats progress. Your photo shows a dust cloud, not a concrete tube at least 3' thick. 3' thick concrete doesn't look like dust, it looks like big pieces of concrete. Fireproofing and lightweight concrete floors look like dust when collapsing. Like I said you're not qualified to analyze collapse photos, just stick to what you can see on the ground... no large concrete wall pieces.

 

[Christophera]

1. Robertson/Jones audio states clearly that the structure was "core columns and perimeter columns" (~18:00-19:00). Thanks! <this question was resolved. only steel columns were "structure">
http://www.imploded.org/BOMBED/s_jones_robertson_061026.mp3

Wrong, Newsweek clearly states,
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.

and the information comes from Robertson. You have failed to answer if you think Robertson did not request a correction if the info is wrong, or if Newsweek refused to correct. You, ........ are not accountable. The radio discussion has been edited and JONES identifies steel core columns.

1. Newsweek was clearly wrong, unless they misinterpreted the fireproof "shaftwalls" as concrete.

Bwahahaahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, blah, blah, blah.

As if this showed drywall. Bwahahaahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, herr kaiser, ......... you belong in Berlin, 1933.

 

[kyzr]

1. Robertson/Jones audio states clearly that the structure was "core columns and perimeter columns" (~18:00-19:00). Thanks! <this question was resolved. only steel columns were "structure">
http://www.imploded.org/BOMBED/s_jones_robertson_061026.mp3
a. Newsweek was clearly wrong, unless they misinterpreted the fireproof "shaftwalls" as concrete.
b. We can resolve this with a quick email to Mr. Robertson. That would either confirm or end the "disappearing concrete wall" conspiracy. Just ask him if the core had structural concrete walls or not.
c. The conspiracy would need better proof of concrete walls than a misprint in Newsweek.
d. You need to show the remnants of wall on the ground, there would be 12 miles of wall that you don't see lying on the ground.
e. I provided several independent sources that show the towers did not have concrete core
walls. (FEMA, NIST, Robertson, Guardian, and photos that don't show R/C walls on the ground) You need to show several sources of the reinforced concrete walls at least 3' thick on drawings and on the ground. You never show any concrete wall pieces on the ground.

2. Fire would never be a cause of collapse in a tower with a concrete structural core. Dumbed down and divided America is expected to accept steel core columns because of cognitive distortions used in presentation. There was fire, steel does bend when it is heated. We know how dumb the perps want Americans to be and assist them to assume that small fires on a few floors could heat the entire steel structure as if Allahs great torch from hell came from the ground and raised it all uniformly to that temperature at one moment to cause a free fall collapse. No way, even in hell.

I provided a link, from "The Guardian" which is very neutral source of information, as well as from other credible sources. No mention of concrete walls.
Then you need to define what possible gain the "conspiracy" could have from lying about the concrete walls: One guardian article should equal one Newsweek misprint. As for the "small fire" did you see the fireball at impact? There were hundreds of thousands of gallons of jet fuel in the jets that created massive fire, plus the jet impact knocked the fireproofing off the steel. so you have a massive fire and no fireproofing, the towers collapsed exactly as predicted by the NIST engineers.
Plus, part-B of the question:
what possible gain would a conspiracy have to say that there were or were not concrete walls? The conspiracy makes no sense, just ask Mr. Robertson.

3. This thread is not about what brought the towers down, it is about what was brought down, the towers themselves. The towers survived 110mph winds, and they were designed for 120mph, while probably capable of surviving 140mph because the method of construction was so good. The concrete tubular core kept the steel perfectly aligned in its maximum load bearing position. The hat truss was bearing on the top of the concrete tube which absolutely made the moment frames and transfer of sway into compression loads optimized. Moment frames and that transfer with that mechanism do not work well all in the same material because that which is trying to resist the flex, flexes as much as that which it is trying to brace and stiffen. The core resisted torsion supremely, so oscillation was gone.

3. So you agree that there was no "secret method of mass murder" , correct ? If not, you need to say what it was.

Off topic, except for the deception. FEMA, guiliani were involved as well as a few other unidentified actors.

4. You continually fail to describe the conspiracy. Who all was supposedly involved? You get no credit for saying Rudy did it....(thats an LOL actually)
The towers were built way before Rudy came to NY. He had nothing to gain from the tower design. Even Silverstein had nothing to gain/lose. The buildings were insured. The insurance companies would be all over any "wall conspiracy". The Port Authority also has all the tower design info, so you need to see that there were way too many people involved to cover anything up. who would gain anything from disappearing concrete walls? No one Its a stupid conspiracy, really dumb.

5. They were also fine until the sunlight of September 11, 2001 hit them. Off topic herr kaiser.

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. the "question is: what difference did it make if it had concrete walls or not? The towers didn't just "fall down" from bad design. The designs were reviewed by NIST and ASCE and many others who all said that the buildings, w/o concrete walls, fell exactly as engineers would expect.
If the jets didn't hit them the design was fine. I don't see where the "wall conspiracy" came from, its just stupidity.

6. Are you competing with divot for how much BS you can assert? Not a question herr kaiser.

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? <thats an on-topic question>
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?
Its engineering proof that the documented sway the towers experienced could not happen if concrete walls were present. Steel columns sway, concrete core walls don't. Thats engineering, not bullshit. Your conspiracy is bullshit.

 

[Modbert]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ria37d9mInY[/ame]

 

[Christophera]

Guess where the truth movement gets its plans for the Twins? From Larry Silverstein.

Those are linked from the ae911truth.org website

North Tower Blueprints

Then it turns out that Gregg Roberts of AE911Truth works with Dwain Deets and Jim Hoffman where the ae911truth.org blueprint links lead. Deets has connections to military as does Hoffman and has worked for decades in the drone industry. Full story here.

Strange Bedfellows: AE911Truth, the Drone Industry, and Dwain Deets « American Everyman

FEMA connected to NIST connected to Gage connected to Hoffman connected to Deets Connected to Roberts connected to Jones, connected to Silverstein ALL BY THE STEEL CORE COLUMN DESIGN that cannot be independently evidenced with verified data.

 

[Modbert]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_C2HJvtRDY[/ame]

 

[Christophera]

doggie, if you go to JREF you might get some baking recipes, cat pics and beer bottle songs.
FEMA deceived NIST and the cause of death on 3,000 ddeath certificates is invalid.

The FEMA core,

On 9-11 we see this as the core of WTC 2

only concrete can stand like that after thousands of tons of steel crashes over it.

Leslie Roberts identifies the concrete core in an interview with Newsweek on September 13, 2001

 

[DiveCon]

doggie, if you go to JREF you might get some baking recipes, cat pics and beer bottle songs.
FEMA deceived NIST and the cause of death on 3,000 ddeath certificates is invalid.

The FEMA core,



On 9-11 we see this as the core of WTC 2



only concrete can stand like that after thousands of tons of steel crashes over it.

Leslie Roberts identifies the concrete core in an interview with Newsweek on September 13, 2001

ROFLMAO

JREF must have had a blast with you

 

[Christophera]

doggie, if you go to JREF you might get some baking recipes, cat pics and beer bottle songs.
FEMA deceived NIST and the cause of death on 3,000 ddeath certificates is invalid.

The FEMA core,



On 9-11 we see this as the core of WTC 2



only concrete can stand like that after thousands of tons of steel crashes over it.

Leslie Roberts identifies the concrete core in an interview with Newsweek on September 13, 2001

ROFLMAO

JREF must have had a blast with you

I received the JREF victory award. A custom made video produced by bonavada that demonstrated their total inability to produce anything whatsover to defeat my postion in 260 pages of thread. They would follow me around and post it to try and extend their juvenile ad hominum style, and I would repost it on my own, to demonstrate the total lack of anything reasonable. bonavada removed it from youtube after a year because it was quite obvious that had nothign more than ad hominum.

They banned me from 3 hours after the Viginia Tech shooting of 32 people in order to keep me from reviving a thread that talked about mind controlled mass murderers where I showed they supported lawless government when government could be doing things to investigate and stop such killings.

I kicked their ass, ........ so they banned me to prevent more of it. In other words, they wouldn't let me play anymore. So I'm here to make line drives and leave a big divot everytime.

 

[Modbert]

This sounds like a job for:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0o1-PlON3ss[/ame]

 

[Modbert]

Though maybe these would be cheaper:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qjpXFZVKeo&feature=related[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=375ENQbru8s&feature=related[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2e5q6ubDlZE&feature=related[/ame]

 

[Christophera]

This sounds like a job for:

Curious how the perpetrators allow such disrespect for the living who try to find justice for the dead and protect the living and help them with their grief by bringing the best closure of all, understanding.

The children that lost parent will deeply appreciate that, whenever it comes.

 

[Modbert]

Curious how the perpetrators allow such disrespect for the living who try to find justice for the dead and protect the living and help them with their grief by bringing the best closure of all, understanding.

The children that lost parent will deeply appreciate that, whenever it comes.

With every thread you make, you do a good enough job of that by yourself. You don't need me to help you make a fool of yourself and disrespect the dead.

Though I would say hire these guys, you probably think they are part of the conspiracy:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnuGhuNZnFs[/ame]

If you had money, you could hire these guys:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIfuaUTH9Y4[/ame]

 

[kyzr]

Guess where the truth movement gets its plans for the Twins? From Larry Silverstein.

Those are linked from the ae911truth.org website

North Tower Blueprints

Then it turns out that Gregg Roberts of AE911Truth works with Dwain Deets and Jim Hoffman where the ae911truth.org blueprint links lead. Deets has connections to military as does Hoffman and has worked for decades in the drone industry. Full story here.

Strange Bedfellows: AE911Truth, the Drone Industry, and Dwain Deets « American Everyman

FEMA connected to NIST connected to Gage connected to Hoffman connected to Deets Connected to Roberts connected to Jones, connected to Silverstein ALL BY THE STEEL CORE COLUMN DESIGN that cannot be independently evidenced with verified data.

okay, so show me the big chunks of 3' thick reinforced concrete all over the ground. 4-walls x 1350' high is over a mile of wall about 90' wide. So where is all this concrete, especially if you say it collapsed last on your dust photos??

They arent there, they arent anywhere, why? Just look at the core plans you posted and you can plainly see (if you can read a drawing) that there are no concrete walls. here is one example http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/plans/doc/pac1TowerA/A-A-47_3.png

 

[kyzr]

Curious how the perpetrators allow such disrespect for the living who try to find justice for the dead and protect the living and help them with their grief by bringing the best closure of all, understanding.
The children that lost parent will deeply appreciate that, whenever it comes.

With every thread you make, you do a good enough job of that by yourself. You don't need me to help you make a fool of yourself and disrespect the dead. Though I would say hire these guys, you probably think they are part of the conspiracy: If you had money, you could hire these guys:

The only thing stupid is doing is perpetrating is this moronic thread. The SNs piloted the jets, the SNs killed 3,000 Americans.

 

[kyzr]

1. Robertson/Jones audio states clearly that the structure was "core columns and perimeter columns" (~18:00-19:00). Thanks! <this question was resolved. only steel columns were "structure">
http://www.imploded.org/BOMBED/s_jones_robertson_061026.mp3
a. Newsweek was clearly wrong, unless they misinterpreted the fireproof "shaftwalls" as concrete.
b. We can resolve this with a quick email to Mr. Robertson. That would either confirm or end the "disappearing concrete wall" conspiracy. Just ask him if the core had structural concrete walls or not.
c. The conspiracy would need better proof of concrete walls than a misprint in Newsweek.
d. You need to show the remnants of wall on the ground, there would be 12 miles of wall that you don't see lying on the ground.
e. I provided several independent sources that show the towers did not have concrete core
walls. (FEMA, NIST, Robertson, Guardian, and photos that don't show R/C walls on the ground) You need to show several sources of the reinforced concrete walls at least 3' thick on drawings and on the ground. You never show any concrete wall pieces on the ground.

2. Fire would never be a cause of collapse in a tower with a concrete structural core. Dumbed down and divided America is expected to accept steel core columns because of cognitive distortions used in presentation. There was fire, steel does bend when it is heated. We know how dumb the perps want Americans to be and assist them to assume that small fires on a few floors could heat the entire steel structure as if Allahs great torch from hell came from the ground and raised it all uniformly to that temperature at one moment to cause a free fall collapse. No way, even in hell.

I provided a link, from "The Guardian" which is very neutral source of information, as well as from other credible sources. No mention of concrete walls.
Then you need to define what possible gain the "conspiracy" could have from lying about the concrete walls: One guardian article should equal one Newsweek misprint. As for the "small fire" did you see the fireball at impact? There were hundreds of thousands of gallons of jet fuel in the jets that created massive fire, plus the jet impact knocked the fireproofing off the steel. so you have a massive fire and no fireproofing, the towers collapsed exactly as predicted by the NIST engineers.
Plus, part-B of the question:
what possible gain would a conspiracy have to say that there were or were not concrete walls? The conspiracy makes no sense, just ask Mr. Robertson.

3. This thread is not about what brought the towers down, it is about what was brought down, the towers themselves. The towers survived 110mph winds, and they were designed for 120mph, while probably capable of surviving 140mph because the method of construction was so good. The concrete tubular core kept the steel perfectly aligned in its maximum load bearing position. The hat truss was bearing on the top of the concrete tube which absolutely made the moment frames and transfer of sway into compression loads optimized. Moment frames and that transfer with that mechanism do not work well all in the same material because that which is trying to resist the flex, flexes as much as that which it is trying to brace and stiffen. The core resisted torsion supremely, so oscillation was gone.

3. So you agree that there was no "secret method of mass murder" , correct ? If not, you need to say what it was.

Off topic, except for the deception. FEMA, guiliani were involved as well as a few other unidentified actors.

4. You continually fail to describe the conspiracy. Who all was supposedly involved? You get no credit for saying Rudy did it....(thats an LOL actually)
The towers were built way before Rudy came to NY. He had nothing to gain from the tower design. Even Silverstein had nothing to gain/lose. The buildings were insured. The insurance companies would be all over any "wall conspiracy". The Port Authority also has all the tower design info, so you need to see that there were way too many people involved to cover anything up. who would gain anything from disappearing concrete walls? No one Its a stupid conspiracy, really dumb.

5. They were also fine until the sunlight of September 11, 2001 hit them. Off topic herr kaiser.

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. the "question is: what difference did it make if it had concrete walls or not? The towers didn't just "fall down" from bad design. The designs were reviewed by NIST and ASCE and many others who all said that the buildings, w/o concrete walls, fell exactly as engineers would expect.
If the jets didn't hit them the design was fine. I don't see where the "wall conspiracy" came from, its just stupidity.

6. Are you competing with divot for how much BS you can assert? Not a question herr kaiser.

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? <thats an on-topic question>
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?
Its engineering proof that the documented sway the towers experienced could not happen if concrete walls were present. Steel columns sway, concrete core walls don't. Thats engineering, not bullshit. Your conspiracy is bullshit.

 

[kyzr]

1. You mention a list of names of people involved with the design/construction of the towers. Thats all. You don't mention the port authority who was in-charge of the project. You also don't say what the purpose of the conspiracy was. Why would anyone lie about something that was so visible? Your conspiracy makes no sense.
You also need to answer these items which disprove your stupid senseless conspiracy.

2. The newsweek article and that clip from nowhere show nothing, prove nothing. They would not stand-up in court as proof. I can bring the following experts in to explain the towers. Who do you think wins? The experts.

Fema, nist, and the engineering community know what they are doing. Here are a few links from qualified experts, not math majors or physics majors who know nothing about engineering skyscrapers or demolition.

professor: Design flaws caused world trade center collapse | oakland tribune newspaper | find articles at bnet

purdue study supports wtc collapse findings - usatoday.com

asce

department of fire protection engineering - professor barnett helps investigate wtc collapse

you think all the democrats in congress are part of the bush 9/11 conspiracy??
the investigation of the world trade center collapse: Findings, recommendations, and next steps

3. Here is a link that debunks many stupid conspiracy theories.
debunking the 9/11 myths: Special report - popular mechanics

4. Check this link out, it has "expert opinions" and lots of photos
collapse of the world trade center -debunk 9/11 myths

5. I can even explain the "pools of molten metal" that some conspiracies point to as proof. Those are where the clean-up guys cut up the massive steel columns. I remember seeing this big dude with some type of pipe cutting torch melting thru the massive steel columns.

So we have all these "expert engineers" including robertson who designed the towers on one side. Then we have idiots putting no credible proof up for crackpot conspiracy theories. Who do you think has a better grasp of what happened? The jet impacts caused the towers to collapse. The towers had no full-height r/c shear walls.[/quote]

 

[Christophera]

Guess where the truth movement gets its plans for the Twins? From Larry Silverstein.

Those are linked from the ae911truth.org website

North Tower Blueprints

Then it turns out that Gregg Roberts of AE911Truth works with Dwain Deets and Jim Hoffman where the ae911truth.org blueprint links lead. Deets has connections to military as does Hoffman and has worked for decades in the drone industry. Full story here.

Strange Bedfellows: AE911Truth, the Drone Industry, and Dwain Deets « American Everyman

FEMA connected to NIST connected to Gage connected to Hoffman connected to Deets Connected to Roberts connected to Jones, connected to Silverstein ALL BY THE STEEL CORE COLUMN DESIGN that cannot be independently evidenced with verified data.

okay, so show me the big chunks of 3' thick reinforced concrete all over the ground.[/url]

The plans from silverstein have been digitally altered to appear ad refined drawings by the addition of revision tables. The anomalies found inthe revision tables show that fact. They are not the final plans or even close. They are the first preliminaries that went to Yamasaki. Grossly obsolete. Get the official plans to make your point about steel core columns and show the interconnecting braces.

One pixel wide space and pixel straight lines are not possible with a scan of a pencil drawing at that scale.

If the plans are real show the sheets that define the diagonal and horizontal braces between the supposed steel core columns.

No cameras were allowed at ground zero because the perpetrators did not want pictures of the massive concrete that did survive the fall.

http://photofocus.com/2009/04/10/who-started-the-war-on-photography/
Rudy Giuliani, seemed to declare war on photographers. He had the police block off more than a square mile surrounding the World Trade Center, calling it a crime scene. The Mayor ordered that anyone with a camera who even stopped or stood still near the area should be arrested and jailed.

 

[kyzr]

Guess where the truth movement gets its plans for the Twins? From Larry Silverstein.
Those are linked from the ae911truth.org website
Then it turns out that Gregg Roberts of AE911Truth works with Dwain Deets and Jim Hoffman where the ae911truth.org blueprint links lead. Deets has connections to military as does Hoffman and has worked for decades in the drone industry.
FEMA connected to NIST connected to Gage connected to Hoffman connected to Deets Connected to Roberts connected to Jones, connected to Silverstein ALL BY THE STEEL CORE COLUMN DESIGN that cannot be independently evidenced with verified data.

okay, so show me the big chunks of 3' thick reinforced concrete all over the ground.

The plans from silverstein have been digitally altered to appear as refined drawings by the addition of revision tables. The anomalies found inthe revision tables show that fact. They are not the final plans or even close. They are the first preliminaries that went to Yamasaki. Grossly obsolete. Get the official plans to make your point about steel core columns and show the interconnecting braces.

One pixel wide space and pixel straight lines are not possible with a scan of a pencil drawing at that scale. If the plans are real show the sheets that define the diagonal and horizontal braces between the supposed steel core columns. No cameras were allowed at ground zero because the perpetrators did not want pictures of the massive concrete that did survive the fall.

Rudy Giuliani, seemed to declare war on photographers. He had the police block off more than a square mile surrounding the World Trade Center, calling it a crime scene. The Mayor ordered that anyone with a camera who even stopped or stood still near the area should be arrested and jailed.[/b]

1. There is no sane reason for anyone to digitally alter thousands of drawings. Give me a few sane reasons why anyone would hire designers to alter out concrete walls on thousands of drawings, if they were there? There is no sane reason, because they weren't there, the drawings were accurate, just email Mr. Robertson if you have any stones.

2. No cameras were allowed at ground zero, got a link? Thats bullshit. They probably didn't want close-ups of the dead out of respect, but there are thousands of photos of the mess, and no photos of any concrete wall debris.