FEMA Deceives Nation About Twin Towers Core

[kyzr]

My debate points were never addressed:
1. The WTC cores were always made of steel. I saw the original design, and saw the buildings being constructed.

You must have seen the documentary I saw, that Dr. Larsen searched for and found signs of. Download the .mp3 where he talks about it. 6/20/07 interview (documentary search update 17:50 minutes)

If you saw the building being built then you'll be able to define the FEMA structure within 9-11 images. Of course you have no credibility since this....

You have ZERO except a photo of the collapse. You have no idea what credibility is. Look at these photos of the WTC tower construction. You can see exactly what I saw, and what the truth is. The core was STEEL
911 Links - WTC Core Construction
Great Buildings Image - World Trade Center - More Images
Notice the cranes simply erecting steel with NO CONCRETE FORMWORK. If concrete was used for the core it would have slowed the erection since concrete needs time to harden.

Here you go, research the truth all you want.
911 Links - WTC Construction, Plans & Elevations, Power, Elevators,Underground, Security, Pre-9/11 Photos, Tenan

 

[Christophera]

My debate points were never addressed:
1. The WTC cores were always made of steel. I saw the original design, and saw the buildings being constructed.

You must have seen the documentary I saw, that Dr. Larsen searched for and found signs of. Download the .mp3 where he talks about it. 6/20/07 interview (documentary search update 17:50 minutes)

If you saw the building being built then you'll be able to define the FEMA structure within 9-11 images. Of course you have no credibility since this....

You have ZERO except a photo of the collapse. You have no idea what credibility is. Look at these photos of the WTC tower construction. You can see exactly what I saw, and what the truth is. The core was STEEL

It is now certain you are clueless about construction, or you would not have posted that particular link. You posted and image which is MY evidence against stel core columns. The 3rd one down.

it shows the steel inside the core, left and right of the center crane, having "butt plates" on the tops of them. Butt plates are no where near strong enough to join sections of what would be "core column" together.

Butt plates are used to join elevator guide rail support steel togther. "Core columns" require a 100% fillet weld such as what is diagramed here joining I beam.

Elevator guide rail support steel has no lateral strength and fell as soon as the demise of the towers began, which is why there are no core columns seen here left of this end view of the western concrete core wall of WTC 1. Right of the heavy concrete wall, is an interior box column which is outside the core area. One of the 24 columns which did exists surrounding the concrete core.

So now you've shown you havn't a clue about construction, AFTER showing that you alter posts to try and make peoples statements shows something they don't.

 

[kyzr]

It is now certain you are clueless about construction, or you would not have posted that particular link. You posted an image which is MY evidence against steel core columns. The 3rd one down.

it shows the steel inside the core, left and right of the center crane, having "butt plates" on the tops of them. Butt plates are no where near strong enough to join sections of what would be "core column" together. Butt plates are used to join elevator guide rail support steel togther. "Core columns" require a 100% fillet weld such as what is diagramed here joining I beam.

Elevator guide rail support steel has no lateral strength and fell as soon as the demise of the towers began, which is why there are no core columns seen here left of this end view of the western concrete core wall of WTC 1. Right of the heavy concrete wall, is an interior box column which is outside the core area. One of the 24 columns which did exists surrounding the concrete core.

So now you've shown you havn't a clue about construction, AFTER showing that you alter posts to try and make peoples statements shows something they don't.

I'm not sure how many tall structures you've designed, but I've designed several. Your continued attempts to lie about the original design are childish. The WTC towers were designed by professionals, and constructed per the drawings. They stood 40-years and would have stood 40 more if the jet liners weren't crashed into them by muslim terrorists. The steel superstructure was comprised of 12 different types of steel in order to keep the floors level. If a concrete core was used the floors would have been severely pitched. Hanging your hat on construction details is laughable. Many times temporary erection connections are used with the full-penetration welds made after the steel is up.

The original WTC design is NOT a controversy or a conspiracy. Only idiots would attempt to disprove the obvious, a steel core, just like the photos show, believe your lying eyes.

 

[DiveCon]

It is now certain you are clueless about construction, or you would not have posted that particular link. You posted an image which is MY evidence against steel core columns. The 3rd one down.

it shows the steel inside the core, left and right of the center crane, having "butt plates" on the tops of them. Butt plates are no where near strong enough to join sections of what would be "core column" together. Butt plates are used to join elevator guide rail support steel togther. "Core columns" require a 100% fillet weld such as what is diagramed here joining I beam.

Elevator guide rail support steel has no lateral strength and fell as soon as the demise of the towers began, which is why there are no core columns seen here left of this end view of the western concrete core wall of WTC 1. Right of the heavy concrete wall, is an interior box column which is outside the core area. One of the 24 columns which did exists surrounding the concrete core.

So now you've shown you havn't a clue about construction, AFTER showing that you alter posts to try and make peoples statements shows something they don't.

I'm not sure how many tall structures you've designed, but I've designed several. Your continued attempts to lie about the original design are childish. The WTC towers were designed by professionals, and constructed per the drawings. They stood 40-years and would have stood 40 more if the jet liners weren't crashed into them by muslim terrorists. The steel superstructure was comprised of 12 different types of steel in order to keep the floors level. If a concrete core was used the floors would have been severely pitched. Hanging your hat on construction details is laughable. Many times temporary erection connections are used with the full-penetration welds made after the steel is up.

The original WTC design is NOT a controversy or a conspiracy. Only idiots would attempt to disprove the obvious, a steel core, just like the photos show, believe your lying eyes.

this guy is totally delusional
he sees concrete where none was
and even in the photo he uses there is NO CONCRETE there

 

[kyzr]

One more wood stake into this bogus topic. Here is a photo of the new Freedom Tower. This puppy does in-fact have a concrete core. Please notice the difference in the steel framing size here, much smaller than in the original WTC, because the concrete provides most of the strength. Also, note how the concrete surrounds the steel. This is necessary because the concrete needs continuous steel reinforcing bars, which couldn't exist in the original WTC, there simply wasn't room for the reinforcing bars with the massive steel framing.

 

[Christophera]

One more wood stake into this bogus topic. Here is a photo of the new Freedom Tower. This puppy does in-fact have a concrete core. Please notice the difference in the steel framing size here, much smaller than in the original WTC, because the concrete provides most of the strength. Also, note how the concrete surrounds the steel. This is necessary because the concrete needs continuous steel reinforcing bars, which couldn't exist in the original WTC, there simply wasn't room for the reinforcing bars with the massive steel framing.

Your attempted explanation shows you know almost nothing about construction. You are implying with you last sentence that steel reinforcing of concrete is done OUTSIDE the concrete where the steel is. Steel rebar is ALWAYS inside the concrete.

You are really dense. If the steel core columns existed, then they would be visible in 9-11 images. The only thing visible is concrete surrounding the core, in ALL 9-11 images.

The east core wall of WTC 2 toppling into the core area.

You also have failed produce any plans for the twins that shows the needed diagonal and horizontal bracing.

 

[Christophera]

It is now certain you are clueless about construction, or you would not have posted that particular link. You posted an image which is MY evidence against steel core columns. The 3rd one down.

it shows the steel inside the core, left and right of the center crane, having "butt plates" on the tops of them. Butt plates are no where near strong enough to join sections of what would be "core column" together. Butt plates are used to join elevator guide rail support steel togther. "Core columns" require a 100% fillet weld such as what is diagramed here joining I beam.

Elevator guide rail support steel has no lateral strength and fell as soon as the demise of the towers began, which is why there are no core columns seen here left of this end view of the western concrete core wall of WTC 1. Right of the heavy concrete wall, is an interior box column which is outside the core area. One of the 24 columns which did exists surrounding the concrete core.

So now you've shown you havn't a clue about construction, AFTER showing that you alter posts to try and make peoples statements shows something they don't.

I'm not sure how many tall structures you've designed, but I've designed several. Your continued attempts to lie about the original design are childish. The WTC towers were designed by professionals,

If you read things you would see I was describing a structurally inadequate joint between section of core column as you attempt to assert existed.

You would have also read the safety report of August Domel, Ph.d SE. PE ground zero safety report. (He saw FEMA plans 2 weeks after 9-11 at ground zero)
this man is certified as as structural engineer in 12 states. See chapter 2.1 for his description of the concrete core.

 

[kyzr]

One more wood stake into this bogus topic. Here is a photo of the new Freedom Tower. This puppy does in-fact have a concrete core. Please notice the difference in the steel framing size here, much smaller than in the original WTC, because the concrete provides most of the strength. Also, note how the concrete surrounds the steel. This is necessary because the concrete needs continuous steel reinforcing bars, which couldn't exist in the original WTC, there simply wasn't room for the reinforcing bars with the massive steel framing.

Your attempted explanation shows you know almost nothing about construction. You are implying with your last sentence that steel reinforcing of concrete is done OUTSIDE the concrete where the steel is. Steel rebar is ALWAYS inside the concrete.

You are really dense. If the steel core columns existed, then they would be visible in 9-11 images. The only thing visible is concrete surrounding the core, in ALL 9-11 images....

You also have failed produce any plans for the twins that shows the needed diagonal and horizontal bracing.

1. Look dunce. You can't have large steel framing and continuous reinforcing bars in the same concrete wall. I showed you via photo how the new Freedom Tower concrete wall is outside the steel framing. The wall and reinforcing is continuous.

2. Look at the photo in this link and you can plainly see that the concrete floor goes right up to the steel core framing...NO CONCRETE WALL!! WTC Core

3. Your 9/11 images show what was there, gyp board and steel studs, not concrete walls. If concrete walls were not built, they could not be there in any collapse photo, now could they.

4. The WTC was designed using Verendeel Trusses moron.

 

[DiveCon]

One more wood stake into this bogus topic. Here is a photo of the new Freedom Tower. This puppy does in-fact have a concrete core. Please notice the difference in the steel framing size here, much smaller than in the original WTC, because the concrete provides most of the strength. Also, note how the concrete surrounds the steel. This is necessary because the concrete needs continuous steel reinforcing bars, which couldn't exist in the original WTC, there simply wasn't room for the reinforcing bars with the massive steel framing.

Your attempted explanation shows you know almost nothing about construction. You are implying with your last sentence that steel reinforcing of concrete is done OUTSIDE the concrete where the steel is. Steel rebar is ALWAYS inside the concrete.

You are really dense. If the steel core columns existed, then they would be visible in 9-11 images. The only thing visible is concrete surrounding the core, in ALL 9-11 images....

You also have failed produce any plans for the twins that shows the needed diagonal and horizontal bracing.

1. Look dunce. You can't have large steel framing and continuous reinforcing bars in the same concrete wall. I showed you via photo how the new Freedom Tower concrete wall is outside the steel framing. The wall and reinforcing is continuous.

2. Look at the photo in this link and you can plainly see that the concrete floor goes right up to the steel core framing...NO CONCRETE WALL!! WTC Core

3. Your 9/11 images show what was there, gyp board and steel studs, not concrete walls. If concrete walls were not built, they could not be there in any collapse photo, now could they.

4. The WTC was designed using Verendeel Trusses moron.

damn, nice source

look what else i found there

notice: you can actually see through a corner of the core
IE: light is passing through it and NOT where a hallway is

 

[Christophera]

Your attempted explanation shows you know almost nothing about construction. You are implying with your last sentence that steel reinforcing of concrete is done OUTSIDE the concrete where the steel is. Steel rebar is ALWAYS inside the concrete.

You are really dense. If the steel core columns existed, then they would be visible in 9-11 images. The only thing visible is concrete surrounding the core, in ALL 9-11 images....

You also have failed produce any plans for the twins that shows the needed diagonal and horizontal bracing.

1. Look dunce. You can't have large steel framing and continuous reinforcing bars in the same concrete wall. I showed you via photo how the new Freedom Tower concrete wall is outside the steel framing. The wall and reinforcing is continuous.

2. Look at the photo in this link and you can plainly see that the concrete floor goes right up to the steel core framing...NO CONCRETE WALL!! WTC Core

3. Your 9/11 images show what was there, gyp board and steel studs, not concrete walls. If concrete walls were not built, they could not be there in any collapse photo, now could they.

4. The WTC was designed using Verendeel Trusses moron.

damn, nice source

look what else i found there

notice: you can actually see through a corner of the core
IE: light is passing through it and NOT where a hallway is

If you knew how the inner columns of the outer steel frame work were oriented and knew the construction, you would know you are making my point for me. The light is just passing through the space between the inner wall of the outer frame, or its corner column which is outside the core. Thanks for the image of the concrete core.

Your image shows the light between the large box column on the left which is outside the concrete core wall at its base, and the slightly smaller outer dimensioned concrete core at the corner or end of the wall. That 12 foot thick base wall has a tiny utility access hallway running it's length. Light can be seen shining down it. Only 20 horizontal feet of that wall section perhaps could be poured at a time.
If it were steel core columns interconnected with horizontal and diagonal braces, there would be lots of daylight shining through all over the core area.

That being WTC 1, it had a poor start compared to WTC 2 which benfitted from things learned on WTC 1. WTC 1 had the concrete cast in free standing forms for the core wall base. They were removed and the steel exterior was built around it. Backwards, but it was the first tubular cast concrete core built of that size. After that only 7 floors of steel could go up before the concrete core had to catch up.

If this is not true, then Post an image of steel core columns in the core area from 9-11.

I will post an image of the concrete walls of the core showing on 9-11.

A portion of the very top of the core of WTC 2 falling onto WTC 3. The brownish surfaces behind the perimeter walls.

 

[kyzr]

Not sure how to break this to ya, but that brown stuff you think is concrete is actually the inner surface of a perimeter wall. Concrete walls don't have ripples like that.

Besides, if they didn't build concrete walls, they can't be part of the collapse. What part of "there are no concrete walls" don't you understand. They have to be built, and there are no construction photos showing the concrete or the reinforcing.
Game. Set. match. Pick a better conspiracy to defend. There ain't no concrete core, never was one.

An interesting side note. When the WTC towers were built there was no computer large enough to model it. Today's PCs have more computing power than the "supercomputers" of the early sixties. That makes the original design even more impressive.

 

[DiveCon]

Not sure how to break this to ya, but that brown stuff you think is concrete is actually the inner surface of a perimeter wall. Concrete walls don't have ripples like that.

Besides, if they didn't build concrete walls, they can't be part of the collapse. What part of "there are no concrete walls" don't you understand. They have to be built, and there are no construction photos showing the concrete or the reinforcing.
Game. Set. match. Pick a better conspiracy to defend. There ain't no concrete core, never was one.

An interesting side note. When the WTC towers were built there was no computer large enough to model it. Today's PCs have more computing power than the "supercomputers" of the early sixties. That makes the original design even more impressive.

actually, that looks like a piece of floor

 

[Christophera]

Not sure how to break this to ya, but that brown stuff you think is concrete is actually the inner surface of a perimeter wall. Concrete walls don't have ripples like that.

It is an entire piece of perimeter wall caught underneath a portion of the concret core. I've seen an image that shows the concrete still about 15-20 feet over it. Just before it hits WTC 3 the wall flops up against the bottom of the massive piece of concrete hurtling towards the earth.

 

[elvis]

Not sure how to break this to ya, but that brown stuff you think is concrete is actually the inner surface of a perimeter wall. Concrete walls don't have ripples like that.

It is an entire piece of perimeter wall caught underneath a portion of the concret core. I've seen an image that shows the concrete still about 15-20 feet over it. Just before it hits WTC 3 the wall flops up against the bottom of the massive piece of concrete hurtling towards the earth.

fuck off, you cum-belching road-whore. Go play with Terral's uh lightsabre

 

[Christophera]

Not sure how to break this to ya, but that brown stuff you think is concrete is actually the inner surface of a perimeter wall. Concrete walls don't have ripples like that.

It is an entire piece of perimeter wall caught underneath a portion of the concret core. I've seen an image that shows the concrete still about 15-20 feet over it. Just before it hits WTC 3 the wall flops up against the bottom of the massive piece of concrete hurtling towards the earth.

fuck off, you cum-belching road-whore. Go play with Terral's uh lightsabre

I guess that means you have no evidence whatsoever. Very har to support secret methods of mass murder without at least some photoshopped images like gamolon uses.
Do you guys share?

 

[elvis]

It is an entire piece of perimeter wall caught underneath a portion of the concret core. I've seen an image that shows the concrete still about 15-20 feet over it. Just before it hits WTC 3 the wall flops up against the bottom of the massive piece of concrete hurtling towards the earth.

fuck off, you cum-belching road-whore. Go play with Terral's uh lightsabre

I guess that means you have no evidence whatsoever. Very har to support secret methods of mass murder without at least some photoshopped images like gamolon uses.
Do you guys share?

no, buttfuck. WE have all the evidence, and you have NOTHING, fuckstain.

 

[Christophera]

fuck off, you cum-belching road-whore. Go play with Terral's uh lightsabre

I guess that means you have no evidence whatsoever. Very har to support secret methods of mass murder without at least some photoshopped images like gamolon uses.
Do you guys share?

no, buttfuck. WE have all the evidence, and you have NOTHING, fuckstain.

Uhhh, I see no evidence, text is not evidence, your's is not even reasonable in the face of actual evidence.

The Twin Towers had a concrete tubular core.

Not the steel core columns FEMA passes off with this crappy diagram from the first WTC report.

 

[DiveCon]

still too fucking stupid to understand that there was NO CONCRETE in the CORE ABOVE GRADE and the image of a dust cloud does not prove concrete where none was put

 

[Christophera]

still too fucking stupid to understand that there was NO CONCRETE in the CORE ABOVE GRADE and the image of a dust cloud does not prove concrete where none was put

There is a great deal of independently verified evidence like the west end of WTC 1's core. Looking south is the wall in an end view on the left with an interior box column, one of the 24 that actually existed surrounding the core, "the spire" is one.

Add to this photographic evidence from the commission of the crime, the September 13, 2001 Newsweek article about the Twins intereviewing him.

Got image of core columns in core area on 9-11?

got any evidence at all? Please, no misrepresented construction photos claiming that the elevator guide rail support steel is "steel core columns"

 

[DiveCon]

still too fucking stupid to understand that there was NO CONCRETE in the CORE ABOVE GRADE and the image of a dust cloud does not prove concrete where none was put

There is a great deal of independently verified evidence like the west end of WTC 1's core. Looking south is the wall in an end view on the left with an interior box column, one of the 24 that actually existed surrounding the core, "the spire" is one.



Add to this photographic evidence from the commission of the crime, the September 13, 2001 Newsweek article about the Twins intereviewing him.

Got image of core columns in core area on 9-11?

got any evidence at all? Please, no misrepresented construction photos claiming that the elevator guide rail support steel is "steel core columns"

no one has EVER claimed the elevator guide shafts as core column you fucking moron