FEMA Deceives Nation About Twin Towers Core

[DiveCon]

There is cdot regulation for some surfaces of concrete to limit reflection. Steel forms, if well vibrated with vibrators contact on the forms, will bring enough fines to the surface so that oblique reflections at low angles can create reflections that will blind traffic.

Now you're trying to claim they "vibrated" the forms on the WTC?? Even if this process existed (which to my knowledge if doesn't), why would they go to the expense on interior columns? Especially if they are interior columns that are going to be hidden by decorative elements?

and that they used STEEL forms to pour the concrete in

LOL
oh man its getting more ridiculous than before

 

[DiveCon]

The setback storefront corner wrapped in glass facilitates the mutual gaze within and without. Visitors are drawn in by the spectacle and sunlight reflecting off the rear concrete interior façade.

Just one example. When more area is involved with vertical surfaces it become blinding. That is why in California DOT requires draping.

ARCH'IT files / Zaha Hadid's Contemporary Arts Center, Cincinnati, OH

yeah, dipshit, glass is reflective

 

[Christophera]

The concrete elements in your link show no signs of reflection. The glass & plexi-glass are the reflective surfaces.

But that is not why the article says this,

"The setback storefront corner wrapped in glass facilitates the mutual gaze within and without. Visitors are drawn in by the spectacle and sunlight reflecting off the rear concrete interior façade.
"

Below are images of concrete refelcting light. Most are polished concrete. Floors are polished because it is not really possible to form a horizontal surface under a form. Fresh vertical surfaces cast against steel forms are flatter than polished floors and smoother as well. It takes some time for the acids in the air and water to etch out the softer particulates and make the surface rough, non reflecting.

 

[Christophera]

Here's a good example.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

The concrete elements in your link show no signs of reflection. The glass & plexi-glass are the reflective surfaces.

But that is not why the article says this,

"The setback storefront corner wrapped in glass facilitates the mutual gaze within and without. Visitors are drawn in by the spectacle and sunlight reflecting off the rear concrete interior façade.
"

Below are images of concrete refelcting light. Most are polished concrete. Floors are polished because it is not really possible to form a horizontal surface under a form. Fresh vertical surfaces cast against steel forms are flatter than polished floors and smoother as well. It takes some time for the acids in the air and water to etch out the softer particulates and make the surface rough, non reflecting.

If you think 1,3 & 4 are concrete, you're a loony. And #2 is not a reflection, as you can not see the detail of the clouds on the wall. (unless you're Kal-El of Krypton)

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Here's a good example.

A good example of what?? I see light from the opening and the wall fixture directly lighting the concrete, but I do not see any reflections of the same light on any of the other concrete surfaces. If this concrete was truly reflective, you would see images of the orange wall fixture on the roof, floor, and other walls.

 

[Christophera]

It is not that relective. Strong sunlight at a low angle will reflect VERY well off of the last example of how smooth and relective can be.

Most importantly is that the supposed steel core columns and core structure that was supposed to have existed, is NEVER seen on 9-11.

it should be seen here. What we see, by the process of elimination can ONLY be rebar.

 

[DiveCon]

Here's a good example.

A good example of what?? I see light from the opening and the wall fixture directly lighting the concrete, but I do not see any reflections of the same light on any of the other concrete surfaces. If this concrete was truly reflective, you would see images of the orange wall fixture on the roof, floor, and other walls.

an example of concrete with a protective coating over it

 

[Rat in the Hat]

it should be seen here. What we see, by the process of elimination can ONLY be rebar.

If you're within 100 feet, and looking at a 2 story building.

This photo shows structural steel at 1/2+ mile range.

 

[Fizz]

It is not that relective. Strong sunlight at a low angle will reflect VERY well off of the last example of how smooth and relective can be.

Most importantly is that the supposed steel core columns and core structure that was supposed to have existed, is NEVER seen on 9-11.

it should be seen here. What we see, by the process of elimination can ONLY be rebar.

doesnt matter jackass because there was no hallway where you are claiming the reflection was coming from.

you are seeing right through your invisicrete!!!

 

[Liability]

When CriscoFEARa, the Troofer scumbag lying filth, sees the architectural PLANS themselves, and can find no reference to a "concrete" core, the filthy scumbag cowardly dishonest piece of treasonous crap claims (with no basis in reality) that the "plans" are frauds.



Well, they're not fake plans. Eat it you deliberately dishonest piece of shit Troofer bastard.

9-11 Research: North Tower Blueprints

The core structures, like the perimeter wall structures, were 100 percent steel-framed.

9-11 Research: The Core Structures

Yes, CriscoFEARa, you lying sack of shit, even other 9/11 Truthers (with an axe to grind) seem able to acknowledge the obvious: the CORE was 100% steel framed.

 

[DiveCon]

When CriscoFEARa, the Troofer scumbag lying filth, sees the architectural PLANS themselves, and can find no reference to a "concrete" core, the filthy scumbag cowardly dishonest piece of treasonous crap claims (with no basis in reality) that the "plans" are frauds.



Well, they're not fake plans. Eat it you deliberately dishonest piece of shit Troofer bastard.

9-11 Research: North Tower Blueprints

The core structures, like the perimeter wall structures, were 100 percent steel-framed.

9-11 Research: The Core Structures

Yes, CriscoFEARa, you lying sack of shit, even other 9/11 Truthers (with an axe to grind) seem able to acknowledge the obvious: the CORE was 100% steel framed.

his answer to that is those plans are not the official plans
because of some scanner anomaly that he cant identify

 

[slackjawed]

When CriscoFEARa, the Troofer scumbag lying filth, sees the architectural PLANS themselves, and can find no reference to a "concrete" core, the filthy scumbag cowardly dishonest piece of treasonous crap claims (with no basis in reality) that the "plans" are frauds.



Well, they're not fake plans. Eat it you deliberately dishonest piece of shit Troofer bastard.

9-11 Research: North Tower Blueprints

The core structures, like the perimeter wall structures, were 100 percent steel-framed.

9-11 Research: The Core Structures

Yes, CriscoFEARa, you lying sack of shit, even other 9/11 Truthers (with an axe to grind) seem able to acknowledge the obvious: the CORE was 100% steel framed.

his answer to that is those plans are not the official plans
because of some scanner anomaly that he cant identify

Yup, went through that with him too. I take his denial of these plans as proof he is actually purposefully engaging in a mission to deceive for some demented reason.
The "anomoly" as he calls it, is not uncommon in a copy of a set of plans from mylar. Back when I drafted by hand, I used 'sticky back' sections to repair mistakes, make changes, or to insert details. When this is run through a blueprint machine, it leaves no traces, however; when I have scanned my old plans to create a software copy, most of the time these sections of 'sticky back' can usually be seen. I explained that to him at least twice in the past, but he seems to think since he watched somebody somewhere take a set of plans out of thier truck he knows more than everyone else.

The 'anomoly' that he has incessently posted allover the internet looks just like the 'sticky back' changes I had made on some of my projects when I scanned them into software format. The material used to make the 'sticky back' is small enough to put through a normal copy machine to copy commonly used details. That is exactly what agent chrissy's 'anomoly' looks like, a detail copied from paper to sticky back placed on a mylar sheet, then scanned into a computer.

I acvtually think that agent chrissy thinks that the old way of drafting put out the same clean crisp plans as autodesk. The fact is, in the old days we were not worried about little 'anomolies' on our mylar because they didn't show up when blueprints were madeon an amonia based copier. It was only when these mylar plans are scanned into a software format that it is seen.


But then both of you are right, he chooses not to accept these plans both because it disproves the narrative he is trying to create and because he is so fucking clueless.


or maybe i am correct in assuming agent chrissy is really an agent intentionally spreading propaganda.

 

[Christophera]

The plans from wtc7.net are not only NOT OFFICIAL they are obviously do not represent what was built.

To the right of the interior box column, OUTSIDE the 12 foot thick concrete core base wall (with a 3x7 utility hall running the length of it) is a grey mass. Concrete.

This is the 3d floor core plan. It shows there is supposed to be an airshaft, a steam shaft and other things where that massive concrete wall is.

Here's a link to the original at wtc7.net

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/plans/doc/pac1TowerA/A-A-24_1.png

This PROVES the obsolete drawings do NOT represent what was built.

FURTHERMORE:

The plans have been digitally altered to appear as final drawings by the addition of the REVISION TABLES. This image is from A-A-159

The original.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/plans/doc/pac1TowerA/A-A-159_1.png

About 20% of the scanned blueprints have those anomalies that were probably generated from a hasty photoshop project done with some poorly controlled software to alter, slightly, the cut graphics of the intials from some other set of plans scanned as a source of the revision tables.

That is why silverstein DID NOT leak blueprints and ONLY leaked scans.

 

[DiveCon]

The plans from wtc7.net are not only NOT OFFICIAL they are obviously do not represent what was built.

To the right of the interior box column, OUTSIDE the 12 foot thick concrete core base wall (with a 3x7 utility hall running the length of it) is a grey mass. Concrete.



This is the 3d floor core plan. It shows there is supposed to be an airshaft, a steam shaft and other things where that massive concrete wall is.



Here's a link to the original at wtc7.net

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/plans/doc/pac1TowerA/A-A-24_1.png

This PROVES the obsolete drawings do NOT represent what was built.

FURTHERMORE:

The plans have been digitally altered to appear as final drawings by the addition of the REVISION TABLES. This image is from A-A-159



The original.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/plans/doc/pac1TowerA/A-A-159_1.png

About 20% of the scanned blueprints have those anomalies that were probably generated from a hasty photoshop project done with some poorly controlled software to alter, slightly, the cut graphics of the intials from some other set of plans scanned as a source of the revision tables.

That is why silverstein DID NOT leak blueprints and ONLY leaked scans.

you remain a fucking moron

 

[Liability]

Hey CriscoFEARa, you lying fuck, let me set you up.

You will now play the role of the willing participant as I systematically lead you to yet another contradiction in your position.

Should you choose not to cooperate in this effort out of cowardice (and we know you are unmanly since you refuse to support your own offspring, you pussy), I'll just dig up your earlier quotes and some images.

Let's get started, you prissy pussy.

Is it your contention that the Twin Towers fell at free fall speeds?

A simple "yes" or "no" will be required from you, you lying, evasive, cowardly, period-dripping pussy.

Go.

 

[slackjawed]

If a set of plans is sealed and signed, it is an official set of plans whether it is scanned, copied or a blueprint. (wonder if the agent knows the difference)
There are also always preliminary plans, review plans, and plans approved for construction.
All projects will show revisions during the design process, but after they are sealed and this is included in the revision table.
Revision tables get lengthy, and it used to be very common that revision tables were drafted on paper, then copied to a 'sticky back', and afixed to the mylar plans before copying them by running them through an amonia based blueprint machine.
All projects end up with a set of "as-builts", which record exactly what was built. The changes and who sealed and signed the "as builts" will be in a seperate table of revisions.

I numbered three places on agent chrissys picture of his imagined 'anomoly'.

1 points to the 'spikes' in the lines around the border.

2 point to a refracted image of someone's intials on the revision table

3 points to another refracted image.


I have seen all three on plans that I created by hand (the old way prior to about 1990) and subsequently scanned into software. All three conditions are the product of the light being refracted through two layers of mylar in the scanner. If this copy had come from a paper copy, the background would look 'dirty'. If the copy had come from a blueprint, it would not be as neat as it is. This copy likely came from a set of plans on mylar. A set of plans drawn by hand in black india ink on mylar. That makes the best scan. The scale that agent chrissy has blown it up to adds to the 'raggedness' of the lines around the border. Drafting by hand is simply not as neat as drafting by computer, the lines don't come out nearly as clean. The double images of the intials though is the refraction of the light from the scanner projecting through two layers of mylar, with ink on one of them.

agent chrissy is either a fool or someone deliberately trying to deceive.

 

[DiveCon]

i go with he is a fool

 

[Liability]

I'm also gonna now give agent CriscoFEARa a free hint, a partial tip-off, so to speak, in how I am going to get him to shoot himself, figuratively speaking, in hos own foot.

In conjunction with my question to him a couple of posts back, I am going to use an image he himself has posted:

(We know Agent CriscoFEARa is the idiot who likes to post the image, because it's from an "algoxy" posting. See: http://www.usmessageboard.com/2196981-post1204.html)

Come on out, CriscoFEARa, I want to see how you handle it when YOU have to agree that YOU are illogical and make no fucking sense.

Will you cave? Will you whimper? Will you admit that you have been a fucking stooge? Will you call yourself an OCTA agent or some such crap? Will your pinhead mind collapse in on itself by virtue of a mental singularity where you try to embrace both halves of a contradiction?

 

[Liability]

CriscoFEARa:

You are on line, pussy. So why not man up and just answer the question, you cowardly piece of shit?

Can someone as unmanly as you ever man up?

Hmm.