FEMA Deceives Nation About Twin Towers Core

[Gamolon]

Here's another contradiction in your story Chris. Here is your drawing of the core again. Notice the 25' dimension circled in black at the lower left that Chris put in. This 25' dimension is the distance between the OUTER EDGE of his concrete core wall and the INNER edge of the perimeter columns. Remember that 25' dimension. Keep in mind that there were core box columns against the outside of the supposed concrete core which were in turn encased with marble slabs. So the dimension from the MARBLE slabs to the perimeter columns will be even LESS than 25'. Core column thickness plus marble slabs were probably an additional 3'. So that takes that down to 22' between the marble slabs and the perimeter columns.

22'

Next is a photo scaled by Chris himself. The smaller yellow dimension of 31' and 8' was put in by Chris. 31' between the marble wall and the perimeter columns. The other dimensions and annotations are mine.

So in his drawing he gives us 22' from marble wall to perimeter column. In his scaled photo he gives us 31'.

A 9' foot difference.

How is this possible?

 

[Fizz]

Here's another contradiction in your story Chris. Here is your drawing of the core again. Notice the 25' dimension circled in black at the lower left that Chris put in. This 25' dimension is the distance between the OUTER EDGE of his concrete core wall and the INNER edge of the perimeter columns. Remember that 25' dimension. Keep in mind that there were core box columns against the outside of the supposed concrete core which were in turn encased with marble slabs. So the dimension from the MARBLE slabs to the perimeter columns will be even LESS than 25'. Core column thickness plus marble slabs were probably an additional 3'. So that takes that down to 22' between the marble slabs and the perimeter columns.

22'

Next is a photo scaled by Chris himself. The smaller yellow dimension of 31' and 8' was put in by Chris. 31' between the marble wall and the perimeter columns. The other dimensions and annotations are mine.

So in his drawing he gives us 22' from marble wall to perimeter column. In his scaled photo he gives us 31'.

A 9' foot difference.

How is this possible?

"the perpetrators" infiltrated the bureau of weights and measures.

 

[DiveCon]

Here's another contradiction in your story Chris. Here is your drawing of the core again. Notice the 25' dimension circled in black at the lower left that Chris put in. This 25' dimension is the distance between the OUTER EDGE of his concrete core wall and the INNER edge of the perimeter columns. Remember that 25' dimension. Keep in mind that there were core box columns against the outside of the supposed concrete core which were in turn encased with marble slabs. So the dimension from the MARBLE slabs to the perimeter columns will be even LESS than 25'. Core column thickness plus marble slabs were probably an additional 3'. So that takes that down to 22' between the marble slabs and the perimeter columns.

22'

Next is a photo scaled by Chris himself. The smaller yellow dimension of 31' and 8' was put in by Chris. 31' between the marble wall and the perimeter columns. The other dimensions and annotations are mine.

So in his drawing he gives us 22' from marble wall to perimeter column. In his scaled photo he gives us 31'.

A 9' foot difference.

How is this possible?

"the perpetrators" infiltrated the bureau of weights and measures.

i guess everyone is one of christophers "perpetrators" except HIM

 

[Christophera]

Here's another contradiction in your story Chris.

That's called not remembering everything at once.

You state there were still core columns and,

Oxford encyclopedia of Technology and Innovation, published in 1992.

contradicts you and,

Robertson on September 13, 2001

contradicts you and,

August Domel, Ph.d SE. PE.

contradicts you and, all of the evidence from 9-11 contradicts you. The east concrete core wall of WTC 1 topples intot he core area.

What I had remembered wrongly was that the narrow ends were 17 foot thick concrete. They were not, the long sides of the core were. twelve feet in the base wall and 5 feet outside that encasing the interior box columns at the core wall base.

Your photoshopping is not enough,

http://www.usmessageboard.com/2012579-post3749.html

now you have misrepresent an early diagram before I found that last linked photo.

All because you have no evdence and must conceal treason.

 

[Fizz]

Robertson on September 13, 2001

anyone can look at your link and see you are lying. robertson doesnt say it. the reporter says it. she was wrong. your article was removed from newsweek's site because it was wrong and that is why you need to link to MSN.

yet you continue to try to use this as evidence. it shows how FUCKING NUTS you are and how you are not in touch with reality.

 

[elvis]

Here's another contradiction in your story Chris.

That's called not remembering everything at once.

You state there were still core columns and,

Oxford encyclopedia of Technology and Innovation, published in 1992.

contradicts you and,

Robertson on September 13, 2001

contradicts you and,

August Domel, Ph.d SE. PE.

contradicts you and, all of the evidence from 9-11 contradicts you. The east concrete core wall of WTC 1 topples intot he core area.

What I had remembered wrongly was that the narrow ends were 17 foot thick concrete. They were not, the long sides of the core were. twelve feet in the base wall and 5 feet outside that encasing the interior box columns at the core wall base.

Your photoshopping is not enough,

http://www.usmessageboard.com/2012579-post3749.html

now you have misrepresent an early diagram before I found that last linked photo.

All because you have no evdence and must conceal treason.

and you remain a brain-dead fuckstain.

 

[Christophera]

Bwhaaaaaaaaaaaaahaaaha, and you have no evidence, again and again.

The Twin towers had a concrete core just like the engineer of record said on

September 13, 2001

Like Oxford encyclopedia of Technology and Inovation that was published in 1992 identifies a concrete core.

Stupid traitor.

 

[DiveCon]

Bwhaaaaaaaaaaaaahaaaha, and you have no evidence, again and again.

The Twin towers had a concrete core just like the engineer of record said on

September 13, 2001

Like Oxford encyclopedia of Technology and Inovation that was published in 1992 identifies a concrete core.

Stupid traitor.

removed the links to your LIES

Robertson NEVER said there was concrete in the core, that was a stupid reporter
and MSNBC pulled the story because it was WRONG
and your Oxford link doesn't say the WTC had a concrete core, it used the WTC as an example of a skyscraper

 

[Fizz]

Bwhaaaaaaaaaaaaahaaaha, and you have no evidence, again and again.

The Twin towers had a concrete core just like the engineer of record said on

September 13, 2001

Like Oxford encyclopedia of Technology and Inovation that was published in 1992 identifies a concrete core.

Stupid traitor.

steel core.

 

[CurveLight]

Bwhaaaaaaaaaaaaahaaaha, and you have no evidence, again and again.

The Twin towers had a concrete core just like the engineer of record said on

September 13, 2001

Like Oxford encyclopedia of Technology and Inovation that was published in 1992 identifies a concrete core.

Stupid traitor.

removed the links to your LIES

Robertson NEVER said there was concrete in the core, that was a stupid reporter
and MSNBC pulled the story because it was WRONG
and your Oxford link doesn't say the WTC had a concrete core, it used the WTC as an example of a skyscraper

You're too stoopid to know how to use a cell phone but you want to talk about skyscrapers? Rotfl! Then you flat out lie about the Oxford link. When it looks impossible for you to be any more stoopid you somehow manage to kill a few more brain cells. You're such a pathetic fucking bitch.

 

[Fizz]

Bwhaaaaaaaaaaaaahaaaha, and you have no evidence, again and again.

The Twin towers had a concrete core just like the engineer of record said on

September 13, 2001

Like Oxford encyclopedia of Technology and Inovation that was published in 1992 identifies a concrete core.

Stupid traitor.

removed the links to your LIES

Robertson NEVER said there was concrete in the core, that was a stupid reporter
and MSNBC pulled the story because it was WRONG
and your Oxford link doesn't say the WTC had a concrete core, it used the WTC as an example of a skyscraper

You're too stoopid to know how to use a cell phone but you want to talk about skyscrapers? Rotfl! Then you flat out lie about the Oxford link. When it looks impossible for you to be any more stoopid you somehow manage to kill a few more brain cells. You're such a pathetic fucking bitch.

tell us again how phone profiles in cell phones are hardwired!! HAHAHAHahahaha!!!

he's right about the oxford link too, jackass.

 

[CurveLight]

removed the links to your LIES

Robertson NEVER said there was concrete in the core, that was a stupid reporter
and MSNBC pulled the story because it was WRONG
and your Oxford link doesn't say the WTC had a concrete core, it used the WTC as an example of a skyscraper

You're too stoopid to know how to use a cell phone but you want to talk about skyscrapers? Rotfl! Then you flat out lie about the Oxford link. When it looks impossible for you to be any more stoopid you somehow manage to kill a few more brain cells. You're such a pathetic fucking bitch.

tell us again how phone profiles in cell phones are hardwired!! HAHAHAHahahaha!!!

he's right about the oxford link too, jackass.

I never said profiles are hard wired into phones you child raping piece of shit.....that's right.......had YOUR BACKGROUND CHECKED YOU SICK FUCKING SEX OFFENDER! I did say the airplane mode is hardwired into cell phones. You want to keep lying about what I said? I'll keep pointing out you are a REGISTERED SEX OFFENDER! You fucking shitbag!

 

[Gamolon]

Here's another contradiction in your story Chris. Here is your drawing of the core again. Notice the 25' dimension circled in black at the lower left that Chris put in. This 25' dimension is the distance between the OUTER EDGE of his concrete core wall and the INNER edge of the perimeter columns. Remember that 25' dimension. Keep in mind that there were core box columns against the outside of the supposed concrete core which were in turn encased with marble slabs. So the dimension from the MARBLE slabs to the perimeter columns will be even LESS than 25'. Core column thickness plus marble slabs were probably an additional 3'. So that takes that down to 22' between the marble slabs and the perimeter columns.

22'

Next is a photo scaled by Chris himself. The smaller yellow dimension of 31' and 8' was put in by Chris. 31' between the marble wall and the perimeter columns. The other dimensions and annotations are mine.

So in his drawing he gives us 22' from marble wall to perimeter column. In his scaled photo he gives us 31'.

A 9' foot difference.

How is this possible?

That's called not remembering everything at once.

You state there were still core columns and,

Oxford encyclopedia of Technology and Innovation, published in 1992.

contradicts you and,

Robertson on September 13, 2001

contradicts you and,

August Domel, Ph.d SE. PE.

contradicts you and, all of the evidence from 9-11 contradicts you. The east concrete core wall of WTC 1 topples intot he core area.

What I had remembered wrongly was that the narrow ends were 17 foot thick concrete. They were not, the long sides of the core were. twelve feet in the base wall and 5 feet outside that encasing the interior box columns at the core wall base.

Your photoshopping is not enough,

http://www.usmessageboard.com/2012579-post3749.html

now you have misrepresent an early diagram before I found that last linked photo.

All because you have no evdence and must conceal treason.

Oh I get it now. So your lobby drawing of the core was incorrect. So now ALL the wall thicknesses were 12' at the lobby level? Is that what you claim now?

You're still 4' off on each side moron.



I guess you misremembered even more eh? This is outstanding!!!!

 

[candycorn]

Here's another contradiction in your story Chris. Here is your drawing of the core again. Notice the 25' dimension circled in black at the lower left that Chris put in. This 25' dimension is the distance between the OUTER EDGE of his concrete core wall and the INNER edge of the perimeter columns. Remember that 25' dimension. Keep in mind that there were core box columns against the outside of the supposed concrete core which were in turn encased with marble slabs. So the dimension from the MARBLE slabs to the perimeter columns will be even LESS than 25'. Core column thickness plus marble slabs were probably an additional 3'. So that takes that down to 22' between the marble slabs and the perimeter columns.

22'

Next is a photo scaled by Chris himself. The smaller yellow dimension of 31' and 8' was put in by Chris. 31' between the marble wall and the perimeter columns. The other dimensions and annotations are mine.

So in his drawing he gives us 22' from marble wall to perimeter column. In his scaled photo he gives us 31'.

A 9' foot difference.

How is this possible?

That's called not remembering everything at once.

You state there were still core columns and,

Oxford encyclopedia of Technology and Innovation, published in 1992.

contradicts you and,

Robertson on September 13, 2001

contradicts you and,

August Domel, Ph.d SE. PE.

contradicts you and, all of the evidence from 9-11 contradicts you. The east concrete core wall of WTC 1 topples intot he core area.

What I had remembered wrongly was that the narrow ends were 17 foot thick concrete. They were not, the long sides of the core were. twelve feet in the base wall and 5 feet outside that encasing the interior box columns at the core wall base.

Your photoshopping is not enough,

http://www.usmessageboard.com/2012579-post3749.html

now you have misrepresent an early diagram before I found that last linked photo.

All because you have no evdence and must conceal treason.

Oh I get it now. So your lobby drawing of the core was incorrect. So now ALL the wall thicknesses were 12' at the lobby level? Is that what you claim now?

You're still 4' off on each side moron.



I guess you misremembered even more eh? This is outstanding!!!!

Shit...I even saw that...Its a pretty glaring error if I can spot it.

 

[Christophera]

Oh I get it now. So your lobby drawing of the core was incorrect. So now ALL the wall thicknesses were 12' at the lobby level? Is that what you claim now?

You're still 4' off on each side moron.



I guess you misremembered even more eh? This is outstanding!!!!

It is absolutely consistent with evidence now which confirmed it for me and way closer than your deceptive photoshopping which is INTENDED to be wrong.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2012579-post3749.html

Look at the footbridge and other exterior features showing through the perimeter walls. Bozo agent

 

[Gamolon]

Oh I get it now. So your lobby drawing of the core was incorrect. So now ALL the wall thicknesses were 12' at the lobby level? Is that what you claim now?

You're still 4' off on each side moron.



I guess you misremembered even more eh? This is outstanding!!!!

It is absolutely consistent with evidence now which confirmed it for me and way closer than your deceptive photoshopping which is INTENDED to be wrong.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2012579-post3749.html

Look at the footbridge and other exterior features showing through the perimeter walls. Bozo agent

You're such a dumbass. Even with your "newly remembered claim" that the walls are now 12' thick, you're still off by 4' in your "carefully scaled" hallway photo which you scale at 31' wide.

In one case you say 31' and then in another you say 27'. Which is it? I guess you'll knock off another 4' from each core wall to make them 8' so it matches your 31' scaled hallway. IS that right Chris?

 

[Gamolon]

Chris.

What were the dimensions of the box columns at the lobby level? How wide and how long?

Care to guess?

 

[Fizz]

You're too stoopid to know how to use a cell phone but you want to talk about skyscrapers? Rotfl! Then you flat out lie about the Oxford link. When it looks impossible for you to be any more stoopid you somehow manage to kill a few more brain cells. You're such a pathetic fucking bitch.

tell us again how phone profiles in cell phones are hardwired!! HAHAHAHahahaha!!!

he's right about the oxford link too, jackass.

I never said profiles are hard wired into phones you child raping piece of shit.....that's right.......had YOUR BACKGROUND CHECKED YOU SICK FUCKING SEX OFFENDER! I did say the airplane mode is hardwired into cell phones. You want to keep lying about what I said? I'll keep pointing out you are a REGISTERED SEX OFFENDER! You fucking shitbag!

never been arrested for anything...

but since you seem to think you know me then post my name....

CHECKMATE BITCH!!!

 

[Christophera]

Chris.

What were the dimensions of the box columns at the lobby level? How wide and how long?

Care to guess?

Gumjob,

Why don't you have images of the supposed steel core columns from 9-11?

It was 80 x 120 feet inside and 1,368 feet tall. Where did all the steel columns and diagonal braces go?

Show any of the needed high strength joints to the columns of the diagonals from the columns if they existed

 

[Gamolon]

So let me get this straight Chris.

Your claim now is the the walls, at the lobby level, were ALL 12' thick? That makes your perimeter core wall dimension 144' x 104' with the interior wall dimension of 120' x 80'?

Correct?

Answer me this. Let's take the ling axis part of the core. there are 8 core box columns that YOU claim are spaced at 20', except for the middle two columns were are spaced at about 10'. That gives us 6 spaces at 20' which equals 120'. Plus another 10' between the middle two columns which now gives us 130' from the centerline of the first outside box column to the centerline of the last or 8th box column.

That's 130' from the 1st core box column to the 8th.

Your outer core dimension is 144' now.

So are you now saying that the core columns are ENCASED in concrete up until more than halfway up the tower????? In order for the columns to be OUTSIDE your supposed concrete core walls, the dimension of the long side of your core wall would have to be LESS THAN 130'!!!!



You're still at 144' even AFTER dropping 10' from the 154' length you USED to push around. What a friggin idiot!!!