FEMA Deceives Nation About Twin Towers Core

[eots]

Eots,

Do you agree with Dr. Quintiere's following hypothesis as to what he thinks happened? Here is the quote from his paper.

[quote]An alternative hypothesis with the insulated trusses at the root cause
appears to have more support. Heat transfer analyses, a scale model, and
the UL furnace tests all indicate that the steel trusses can attain temperatures
corresponding to failure based on structural analyses. This hypothesis puts
the blame on the insufficiency of the truss insulation. Something NIST says
was not an issue.

It is a theory ,one alternative hypothesis..it would need to be fully examined
which is why he also said this..


“I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they’ve done; both structurally and from a fire point of view.”

“I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable,” explained Dr. Quintiere. “Let's look at real alternatives that might have been the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Towers and how that relates to the official cause and what's the significance of one cause versus another.”

Dr. Quintiere, one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. “I hope to convince you to perhaps become 'Conspiracy Theorists', but in a proper way

OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

Do you think his hypothesis, based on the data he saw, is incorrect? Yes or no. I can see why you want to avoid answering this. Very telling.
[quote]An alternative hypothesis with the insulated trusses at the root cause
appears to have more support. Heat transfer analyses, a scale model, and
the UL furnace tests all indicate that the steel trusses can attain temperatures
corresponding to failure based on structural analyses. This hypothesis puts
the blame on the insufficiency of the truss insulation. Something NIST says
was not an issue.

[/QUOTE]


hy·poth·e·sis   
[hahy-poth-uh-sis, hi-] Show IPA
–noun, plural -ses  
[-seez] Show IPA
.
1.
a proposition, or set of propositions, set forth as an explanation for the occurrence of some specified group of phenomena, either asserted merely as a provisional conjecture to guide investigation (working hypothesis) or accepted as highly probable in the light of established facts.
2.
a proposition assumed as a premise in an argument.
3.
the antecedent of a conditional proposition.
4.
a mere assumption or guess.

 

[DiveCon]

It is a theory ,one alternative hypothesis..it would need to be fully examined
which is why he also said this..


“I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they’ve done; both structurally and from a fire point of view.”

“I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable,” explained Dr. Quintiere. “Let's look at real alternatives that might have been the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Towers and how that relates to the official cause and what's the significance of one cause versus another.”

Dr. Quintiere, one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. “I hope to convince you to perhaps become 'Conspiracy Theorists', but in a proper way

OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

Do you think his hypothesis, based on the data he saw, is incorrect? Yes or no. I can see why you want to avoid answering this. Very telling.
[quote]An alternative hypothesis with the insulated trusses at the root cause
appears to have more support. Heat transfer analyses, a scale model, and
the UL furnace tests all indicate that the steel trusses can attain temperatures
corresponding to failure based on structural analyses. This hypothesis puts
the blame on the insufficiency of the truss insulation. Something NIST says
was not an issue.

hy·poth·e·sis   
[hahy-poth-uh-sis, hi-] Show IPA
–noun, plural -ses  
[-seez] Show IPA
.
1.
a proposition, or set of propositions, set forth as an explanation for the occurrence of some specified group of phenomena, either asserted merely as a provisional conjecture to guide investigation (working hypothesis) or accepted as highly probable in the light of established facts.
2.
a proposition assumed as a premise in an argument.
3.
the antecedent of a conditional proposition.
4.
a mere assumption or guess.

that one

 

[Christophera]

If this,

did not exist, it could not have collapsed.

This did exist and it is the core of WTC 2, no steel is seen as the diagram above shows.

then, this, a little lower, no steel columns in the core.

 

[Obamerican]

If this,

did not exist, it could not have collapsed.

This did exist and it is the core of WTC 2, no steel is seen as the diagram above shows.

then, this, a little lower, no steel columns in the core.

How many more times are you going to post the same thing?

 

[Christophera]

How many more times are you going to post the same thing?

With your help I won't need to. How many times will this be true when you post nothing supporting a position you have not defined while being against truth.

The core structure of the Twins was a concrete tube. The west wall of WTC 1

 

[DiveCon]

no concrete in that photo, but there are steel core columns that YOU label as something else wrongly

 

[Obamerican]

How many more times are you going to post the same thing?

With your help I won't need to. How many times will this be true when you post nothing supporting a position you have not defined while being against truth.

The core structure of the Twins was a concrete tube. The west wall of WTC 1

I see steel NOT concrete.

 

[Gamolon]

It is a theory ,one alternative hypothesis..it would need to be fully examined
which is why he also said this..


“I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they’ve done; both structurally and from a fire point of view.”

“I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable,” explained Dr. Quintiere. “Let's look at real alternatives that might have been the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Towers and how that relates to the official cause and what's the significance of one cause versus another.”

Dr. Quintiere, one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. “I hope to convince you to perhaps become 'Conspiracy Theorists', but in a proper way

OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

Do you think his hypothesis, based on the data he saw, is incorrect? Yes or no. I can see why you want to avoid answering this. Very telling.
[quote]An alternative hypothesis with the insulated trusses at the root cause
appears to have more support. Heat transfer analyses, a scale model, and
the UL furnace tests all indicate that the steel trusses can attain temperatures
corresponding to failure based on structural analyses. This hypothesis puts
the blame on the insufficiency of the truss insulation. Something NIST says
was not an issue.

hy·poth·e·sis   
[hahy-poth-uh-sis, hi-] Show IPA
–noun, plural -ses  
[-seez] Show IPA
.
1.
a proposition, or set of propositions, set forth as an explanation for the occurrence of some specified group of phenomena, either asserted merely as a provisional conjecture to guide investigation (working hypothesis) or accepted as highly probable in the light of established facts.
2.
a proposition assumed as a premise in an argument.
3.
the antecedent of a conditional proposition.
4.
a mere assumption or guess.

Round and round we go.

Do you agree with his hypothesis, a hypothesis based on evidence he has seen AND the fact that he is an expert in his field, yes or no?

 

[Christophera]

The concrete core is proven by evidence from 9-11 which also disproves steel core columns.

The west concrete core wall of WTC 1 is under the spire and behind the steel framing that held up the floors.

Looking to the south along the west wall is an end view of the concrete core wall.

Elevator guide rail suppor steel is located and identified fastened to the inside of the concrete core wall.

This superimposition is taken from almost exactly the same location as the spire photo at the top and locates it OUTSIDE the core area.

This is rebar that was under the spire and not of the structural steel, so on a slightly different plane just a few feet inside of the structural steel comprising the spire. Interior box columns.

Then Oxford Illustrated Encyclopedia of Invention and Technology, of 1992 identifies a concrete core while the engineer of record does so as well.

 

[Christophera]

The concrete core is proven by evidence from 9-11 which also disproves steel core columns.

The west concrete core wall of WTC 1 is under the spire and behind the steel framing that held up the floors.

Looking to the south along the west wall is an end view of the concrete core wall.

Elevator guide rail suppor steel is located and identified fastened to the inside of the concrete core wall.

This superimposition is taken from almost exactly the same location as the spire photo at the top and locates it OUTSIDE the core area.

This is rebar that was under the spire and not of the structural steel, so on a slightly different plane just a few feet inside of the structural steel comprising the spire. Interior box columns.

Then Oxford Illustrated Encyclopedia of Invention and Technology, of 1992 identifies a concrete core while the engineer of record does so as well.

 

[DiveCon]

posting your delusional bullshit over and over wont change it from BEING delusional bullshit


there is not an iota of concrete in ANY of those photos

 

[Christophera]

Wrong example.

Posting your empty text proves your empty text is misprision of treason. I've posted facts supported by independent authority.

 

[DiveCon]

Wrong example.

Posting your empty text proves your empty text is misprision of treason. I've posted facts supported by independent authority.

every post of yours is empty of facts
so fuck off moron, pay your child support and stop lying to people

 

[Christophera]

As usual, the opposite of what agents post is true.

You will not stand for justice in 3,000 murders, where 2 generations grieve,

and refuse to recognize the injustice of failure to appear on subpoena by law enforcement in a civil suit seeking to show over 3,000 court case files are missing from the record.

I was deprived of justice while trying to protect and obtain the records holding the most important information a society can keep.

The infiltrators are working through you to try and detroy this society, so you will not care about justice and rights.

 

[DiveCon]

you are the only "agent" here?
an agent of massive stupidity

 

[Christophera]

Your text lacks substance and your behavior belies your statment.

The Twin Towers had a concrete core, but they were slightly different. WTC 1 had a strict shear wall design. Floors of the core hallways had steel supports resting on the alternating center walls that also braced the shear walls when crossing the core.

WTC 2 had a pedastal base affording elevator entry at the lobby level. Hallway floors were concrete and overlapped onto the exterior walls with a very heavily reinforced joint making each floor a cell of shear walls. WTC also had a wall crossing the short axis in the middle of the long axis. Rather than flat shear walls every 4 floors below the 43rd there was step in the section of the core, getting smaller as the design went up.

WTC 2 core, viewing long side. Center wall at center makes top of rounded core.

 

[DiveCon]

none of your posts prove a concrete core

 

[Christophera]

Your ability to post text does not qualify you to recognize concrete. It is proven you cannot post images of the steel core columns shown here, in the core area on 9-11.

 

[DiveCon]

your ability to post steel and call it concrete sure as hell doesnt qualify you for anything'

 

[PhysicsExist]

Sign the Petition

Anyone care to question why these 1394 Architects and Engineers are supporting a new investigation? Here are your answers:

WTC7 was not hit by a plane, yet collapsed at freefall speeds into its own footprint. - This Defies Physics

WTC Towers were the first steel high rise buildings to collapse in the history of the world, the fact the investigation protocols were violated, and that the 2 100 story buildings were turned into 3 stories, and dust, makes them question the official NIST/9/11 commission reports.

WTC South Tower collapsed with its top TILTING, yet the tilt stopped, and somehow caused a pancake, symmetrical collapse-This Defies Physics

Nanothermite residue has been discovered.

Mike Gravel has come out in support. (The Pentagon Papers congressman)

Jesse Ventura supports a new investigation. (Former Governor/SEAL)

BuildingWhat? - Building 7 |Please stand with the 9-11 families in calling for a NEW Building 7 investigation - What is Building 7 ? Campaign was on the mainstream media this past november, which has lead to the start of the general publics awareness to the WTC7 collapse. BuildingWhat.org Campaign opened eyes for countless NYC residents who did not even know of the WTC7 collapse.

With an openmind, and 5 minutes, anyone with basic physics knowledge can understand the 'explanation' by NIST is impossible according to Newtonian Physics. Objects cannot freefall through eachother, thus fire and an ensuing collapse was NOT what happened. We saw buildings exploding.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnnXTrw88P4[/ame]