FEMA Deceives Nation About Twin Towers Core

[DiveCon]

Come on coward. Prove me wrong AND I'll leave. You said you could do it.

did you see the natgeo special on last night about the conspiracy theories on 9/11?
it was fantastic

No.



I have to catch a rerun of it. I was busy with my 4 crumbsnatchers (kids).

they took a 6" X 6" square steel column and packed 150 lbs of thermite around it in a steel cone lined with clay(to protect the cone) and set it off
ir didnt even cut that 6" X 6" column

when shown this the conspiracy nutters claimed "well, they used a special type of thermite"(that the experts say doesnt even exist) and just "painted it on the beams"

 

[candycorn]

Come on coward. Prove me wrong AND I'll leave. You said you could do it.

did you see the natgeo special on last night about the conspiracy theories on 9/11?
it was fantastic

No.



I have to catch a rerun of it. I was busy with my 4 crumbsnatchers (kids).

It comes on again this Saturday night (2 broadcasts).

I will be on vacation but I have it set to Tivo.

Can't wait to see them get busted in the mouth once more.

 

[Albury Smith]

Chris, your proof means nothing because you can't even proven your core was physically/dimensionally possible. I have proved it's NOT possible therefore making any of you proof after the fact nothing more than made up fantasy.

It's well known that the towers would not have stood with a steel core because the flex of steel framed structures in the proportion of the towers is too great.

The tacoma Narrows Steel Bridge flexes and collapses in 42 MPH wind and provided an important lesson for engineers.

Consider the Twins were over twice as tall as the bridge was long, they were over twice as wide, they were expected to be permanently loaded with hundreds of thousands of tons, they were only fastened at one end, they were expected to withstand 120 mph winds.
Americans do value their Constitution, their lives, their rights and their freedom. You obviously would destroy [blah, blah, blah...].

Cool. So you're saying that in addition to the gravitional load pulling straight down on the towers, there was a comparable load at a right angle to it, pulling the towers sideways? This can all be easily resolved with photos of these massive concrete core walls, and you can't produce any.

 

[Albury Smith]

did you see the natgeo special on last night about the conspiracy theories on 9/11?
it was fantastic

No.



I have to catch a rerun of it. I was busy with my 4 crumbsnatchers (kids).

they took a 6" X 6" square steel column and packed 150 lbs of thermite around it in a steel cone lined with clay(to protect the cone) and set it off
ir didnt even cut that 6" X 6" column

when shown this the conspiracy nutters claimed "well, they used a special type of thermite"(that the experts say doesnt even exist) and just "painted it on the beams"

I emailed "Box Boy" and suggested that he get some of this special thermite, a steel column, a paint brush or roller, do his own experiment, video the whole thing and post it on his AE911 web site. He wasn't receptive to the idea. He's rather do shit like this: http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/Gagebox.jpg/Gagebox-full;init:.jpg

 

[Christophera]

gams photoshop fakery and potentials for collusive fraud with others working to support that the secret means of mass murder remain unexposed.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/consp...and-infiltration-of-us-gov-2.html#post1478836

You misrepresent WTC 2 lobby as that of WTC 1.

The Twin Towers had different core structures. WTC 1 had a single hall in each deirection per floor over the 43rd to my best memory and the image below shows that.

WTC 2 had 2 hallways in each direction AND elevators that opened onto the lobby through the core wall. The documentary "The Engineering and Construction of the Twin Towers" focused on WTC 1 but did have a little on WTC 2 which actually was finished before WTC 1 because access accross the core and elevators where so much better.

The WTC 2 core base was a totally new design for any building ever. It had a central pedestal with dimensions perhaps 30 feet smaller that the inside core dimension of 80 x 120'. The escalator ran up it. From the pedastal, perpendicuarly outwards from the long axis were walls that went out between the elevator door openings to connect with the interio box columns that are visible from inside the lobby.
People would enter from the lobby then exit from another set of doors on the inside of the same elevator into the core area where a hallway would take them back out to the floors.
The doc showed a cape canaveral launch pad that was used to test the design and the elevator doors were rocket exhaust ports. The gantry weight simulated the core which sat on the perpendicualr walls while the rocket sat on the cenral pedastal.

WTC 1 had black granite panels between the interior box columns. The image selection on the web seems to have been filtered and videos edited so gam has a remote possibility of having something to discount the concrete core, ......... because it has no evidence for steel core columns and much of the concret core evidence discounts steel core columns because the images of 9-11 show an empty core area.

 

[Christophera]

Chris, your proof means nothing because you can't even proven your core was physically/dimensionally possible. I have proved it's NOT possible therefore making any of you proof after the fact nothing more than made up fantasy.

It's well known that the towers would not have stood with a steel core because the flex of steel framed structures in the proportion of the towers is too great.

The tacoma Narrows Steel Bridge flexes and collapses in 42 MPH wind and provided an important lesson for engineers.

Consider the Twins were over twice as tall as the bridge was long, they were over twice as wide, they were expected to be permanently loaded with hundreds of thousands of tons, they were only fastened at one end, they were expected to withstand 120 mph winds.
Americans do value their Constitution, their lives, their rights and their freedom. You obviously would destroy [blah, blah, blah...].

Cool. So you're saying that in addition to the gravitional load pulling straight down on the towers, there was a comparable load at a right angle to it, pulling the towers sideways? This can all be easily resolved with photos of these massive concrete core walls, and you can't produce any.

Untrue.

What is true is that the images from 9-11 showing exactly what existed under extreme stress shows concrete walls and an empty core.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Sounds like they designed it for the IMPACT not the subsequent fires. Funny how Frank didn't say how the screen would stand up after the pencil went through and if the screen caught fire.

I ALREADY addressed that earlier howe they anticipated the fires but since you only read only PARTS of posts,its only natural you missed that.

Nope. Didn't miss that. Everything you have provided as evidence suggests IMPACT or the force of the impact. Can you show me any quote anywhere that says the engineers did studies of the affect of fires and heat on BARE steel columns? Columns without fireproofing? Do you think they had taken into account the fireproofing becoming dislodged and the effects of fire and heat on those bare areas?

All they say about fire is that there would be a great loss of life. Why is it that engineers nowadays can provide calculations and evidence of fires weakening the strength of steel columns/beams to a point that the steel will fail but Robertson somehow missed that? Maybe miscalculated? Can you explain? Did the laws of fire and it's affect on steel somehow change from then 'til now?

Tell you what. You can make this easy on yourself. Go to Leslie Robertson's LERA site and find the contact link for Sawteen See. Send them an email asking if the did studies for the affects of fire on the steel columns. See what they say.

yes Bush dupe,they took all that into accountthey even reinforced the fireproofing after the 1st bombing in 93 on the steel columns. laws of fire? you crack me up cause office fires dont even come close to the temp needed to weaken the steel structures.jet fuel only burns at 1500. To even begin to weaken the steel support columns the fires need to get to temps of at LEAST 2700. AGAIN this just proves how easy you are to be manipulated trusting what ROBERTSON says who they obviously got to. Not going to argue with someone who only lloks at what Robertson says and ignores what Skilling and Demartini said and comes up with desperate attempts to disprove what Demartini said.

Skilling was a senior partner in the firm and your ignoring what HE said and trusting what Robertson a JUNIOR partner says.Thats like trusting Bill Clinton to tell the truth about his escapades with Monica.LOL.you crack me up.You Bush dupes always grasp at straws as well to try and prove your theories correct that the planes and fires caused the towers to collapse when you blatantly ignore videos of suppressed film footage the corporate controlled media never airs that back up what witnesses said about hearing and seeing explosions in the basements BEFORE the plane struck above.Time for you to admit your scared of the truth and living in denial.

 

[Christophera]

Not going to argue with someone who only lloks at what Robertson says and ignores what Skilling and Demartini said and comes up with desperate attempts to disprove what Demartini said.

I think that none of the mentioned are completely dependable. There are varying and perhaps changing degrees of compliance with the perpetrators by the professonals involved.

Skilling of course has passed away. Robertson made his statement of September 13, 2001 on behalf of his historical role as second in charge that he inherited on Skillings passing.

Now, it would be very logical that he be telling the truth there because the huge liability associated within any structural cause of collapse when 3,000 are killed is very undesirable. Accordingly, IF, Newsweek made an error, Robertson, on behalf of that historical role, would demand and receive a correction.

Are you referring to another statement made by him?

Also, in the s. jones, Robertson interview jones says "steel core columns" and Robertson does not correct him. Meaning he may have been getting some pressure to misrepresent more recently.

 

[Christophera]

Then provide your scaled drawing Chris. You're not afraid of something are you?

Same crap. Basing your dimensions on the silverstein plans which are proven to be erroneous is a fraudulent premise and you do that for the purpose of protecting the secret methods of mass murder and destruction of the Consitution.

of course the fact has always been so and I've always asked and you've always evaded. Sick.

 

[DiveCon]

Then provide your scaled drawing Chris. You're not afraid of something are you?

Same crap. Basing your dimensions on the silverstein plans which are proven to be erroneous is a fraudulent premise and you do that for the purpose of protecting the secret methods of mass murder and destruction of the Consitution.

of course the fact has always been so and I've always asked and you've always evaded. Sick.

if they have been proiven to be a fraud, its shouldnt be hard for you to post your proof

 

[eots]

Sounds like they designed it for the IMPACT not the subsequent fires. Funny how Frank didn't say how the screen would stand up after the pencil went through and if the screen caught fire.

steel doesn't...catch fire

No, but heat WEAKENS it and fire DOES produce heat you know. Heat can weaken steel to a point that it fails. Were you aware of that?

Can you answer a simple question for me? If steel can't catch fire (like I apparently thought it did ), can you explain why they put fireproofing on steel beam and columns?

even a guess would suffice at this point.

I am well aware of the properties of steel...and the temperatures and durations of the fire are not sufficient to cause such a collapse or to create molten metal...thermal cutting however would explain both...

 

[Christophera]

steel doesn't...catch fire

No, but heat WEAKENS it and fire DOES produce heat you know. Heat can weaken steel to a point that it fails. Were you aware of that?

Can you answer a simple question for me? If steel can't catch fire (like I apparently thought it did ), can you explain why they put fireproofing on steel beam and columns?

even a guess would suffice at this point.

I am well aware of the properties of steel...and the temperatures and durations of the fire are not sufficient to cause such a collapse or to create molten metal...thermal cutting however would explain both...

If there were steel core columns in the core, which there weren't as can be seen here in the area to the right of the fince, lightly arced vertical elements,

Thermite cutting of vertical surfaces is very difficult and requires a fixture. Such a fixture requires access to all faces of a box column. It surrounds the box column creating a vessle for the thermite which is liquid when burning. It will quickly penetrate, but it must sit in a very undisturbed mass, for the entire time, or penetration will not remain focused and the severing operation is compromised.

When such cutting is done a substancial amount of over kill is calculated in which essentially makes an event where a considerably larger amount of steel is melted, than actually needs to be cut. With that much molten steel, a lot of it from the upper elevations downwards, is going to be falling and flipping all over the place. Be cognizant of the claim of 47 columns, the fact of aprox. 40 foot pieces around GZ, = 1,300 cuts. Molten blobs of steel will be randomly scattered around the building for over a hundred feet.

We did not see any of that. Nor did we see any column cut in such a way at GZ. The appearance is very distinct, rounded, not linear, as the molten thermite leaves the vessal and applies its burning mass with gravity on the steel. It begins to fall along the plane of the box column wall. Messy.

Do we see any molten steel here?

No, we see a massive and amazingly uniform debris wave of sand, gravel and concrete.

Geeeeeeeeeeeeee, I wonder where all that came from?



The nano thermite explosive is a strict fantasy.

http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/88Badmachine88/IH1.jpg

Ordinary high density, high explosives were used everywhere above ground.

Here is the delay and detonation pattern at the towers on 9-11. Who knows enough to identify what kind of an auditory quality it has and why?

Here is a comparison to the most dense, practically, and fastest used in a

[ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=tZRAbUcUkIc]Linear shaped charge[/ame]

 

[KittenKoder]

Sound advice for conspiracy nuts:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8RwkNKIh6s]YouTube - : T.V. : Foamy The Squirrel[/ame]

 

[DiveCon]

No, but heat WEAKENS it and fire DOES produce heat you know. Heat can weaken steel to a point that it fails. Were you aware of that?

Can you answer a simple question for me? If steel can't catch fire (like I apparently thought it did ), can you explain why they put fireproofing on steel beam and columns?

even a guess would suffice at this point.

I am well aware of the properties of steel...and the temperatures and durations of the fire are not sufficient to cause such a collapse or to create molten metal...thermal cutting however would explain both...

If there were steel core columns in the core, which there weren't as can be seen here in the area to the right of the fince, lightly arced vertical elements,

Thermite cutting of vertical surfaces is very difficult and requires a fixture. Such a fixture requires access to all faces of a box column. It surrounds the box column creating a vessle for the thermite which is liquid when burning. It will quickly penetrate, but it must sit in a very undisturbed mass, for the entire time, or penetration will not remain focused and the severing operation is compromised.

When such cutting is done a substancial amount of over kill is calculated in which essentially makes an event where a considerably larger amount of steel is melted, than actually needs to be cut. With that much molten steel, a lot of it from the upper elevations downwards, is going to be falling and flipping all over the place. Be cognizant of the claim of 47 columns, the fact of aprox. 40 foot pieces around GZ, = 1,300 cuts. Molten blobs of steel will be randomly scattered around the building for over a hundred feet.

We did not see any of that. Nor did we see any column cut in such a way at GZ. The appearance is very distinct, rounded, not linear, as the molten thermite leaves the vessal and applies its burning mass with gravity on the steel. It begins to fall along the plane of the box column wall. Messy.

Do we see any molten steel here?

No, we see a massive and amazingly uniform debris wave of sand, gravel and concrete.

Geeeeeeeeeeeeee, I wonder where all that came from?



The nano thermite explosive is a strict fantasy.

http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/88Badmachine88/IH1.jpg

Ordinary high density, high explosives were used everywhere above ground.

Here is the delay and detonation pattern at the towers on 9-11. Who knows enough to identify what kind of an auditory quality it has and why?

Here is a comparison to the most dense, practically, and fastest used in a

[ame="http://youtube.com/watch?v=tZRAbUcUkIc"]Linear shaped charge[/ame]

THE FLOORS ya numbnuts

 

[Christophera]

The navy is in line with what I find in research on nano.

http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/88Badmachine88/IH1.jpg

Very little has been done with it. Certainly nothing developed for battle.

Patents is what I found. The research was vague, perhaps an accelerant, or maybe a fuze for artilery. A rifle cartridge propellent.

Thermite in the basement, I think so. No way else to gt that much heat. It got mixed into the concrete and debris then small amounts all over kept igniting and keeping things hot.

Not useful information at this time. A simple deception is all America can handle, and it has a simple legal compulsion. Due process must be provided. The cause of death has been proven to be inaccurate. The reason for that must be the subject of inquiry.

The deception by FEMA is where to start, where they identify a core like this.

and what we see is this, and independently verifiable evidence says there was a concrete core.

 

[Christophera]

Then provide your scaled drawing Chris. You're not afraid of something are you?

Same crap. Basing your dimensions on the silverstein plans which are proven to be erroneous is a fraudulent premise and you do that for the purpose of protecting the secret methods of mass murder and destruction of the Consitution.

of course the fact has always been so and I've always asked and you've always evaded. Sick.

if they have been proiven to be a fraud, its shouldnt be hard for you to post your proof

If the orange tree has oranges on it, it should be easy to find an apple tree with apples.

Cognitive distortions as constant as this can only be a psyops.

WTF, do you think people are total idiots?

 

[DiveCon]

Same crap. Basing your dimensions on the silverstein plans which are proven to be erroneous is a fraudulent premise and you do that for the purpose of protecting the secret methods of mass murder and destruction of the Consitution.

of course the fact has always been so and I've always asked and you've always evaded. Sick.

if they have been proiven to be a fraud, its shouldnt be hard for you to post your proof

If the orange tree has oranges on it, it should be easy to find an apple tree with apples.

Cognitive distortions as constant as this can only be a psyops.

WTF, do you think people are total idiots?

clearly YOU are
if you think the core had a 12' concrete wall

 

[Christophera]

if they have been proiven to be a fraud, its shouldnt be hard for you to post your proof

If the orange tree has oranges on it, it should be easy to find an apple tree with apples.

Cognitive distortions as constant as this can only be a psyops.

WTF, do you think people are total idiots?

clearly YOU are
if you think the core had a 12' concrete wall

12' + 5' between interior box columns on the north side WTC 1 core base wall as they were encased to the 3rd floor.

This is why the silverstein plans are garbage.

 

[DiveCon]

except that photo does NOT show a 12' X 5' concrete wall
and its TOO big for the forum

 

[Gamolon]

To even begin to weaken the steel support columns the fires need to get to temps of at LEAST 2700.

Can you link the source for that claim? That steel starts to WEAKEN at 2700 F? This link says steel starts to MELT at 2500 F.
WikiAnswers - What is the melting point and boiling point of steel

I think you're getting your terms mixed up.

So link your source for the temperature at which steel begins to MELT and when steel begins to WEAKEN or LOSE IT'S STRENGTH.