What about the WTC 1 Spire?

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Another_Nut
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


those are pics of the columns in A warehouse. I never said there weren't columns found.

I said that they arnt ON TOP OF THE DEBRIS PILES.

at aprox 1:30 into your vid there is dust falling DOWN out of the windows(?) of the tower BEFORE it collapsed . That is the concrete floors being turned to dust and gravity pulling it down. I notice the huge plumes erupting from the top also.

can you find pics of this steel on the debris pile? I can't .


So you want photos of the core columns as found on site rather than photos of retrieved core columns? I'm not certain what benefit you see in the distinction, but whatever. Here's another photo of the wreckage at ground zero, and you can clearly still see portions of the exterior facade still standing.

Notice the pile of long, rectangular objects in the lower right section of the photo. Those are core columns, as proven by their being the same length and shape of the previous photos I posted of a core column as well as being in a location where they would be found in relation to the exterior facade.





posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
I think he means the standing remains of the steel core (spire) not the actual antenna mounted to the top of the building.


Yes I do sorry if this was unclear.



posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Another_Nut
The spire stood for 14seconds after collapse. That is not "falling along with the rest of the building"


Are you seriously suggesting the spire hovered in mid-air for 14 seconds while the rest of the building collapsed? The first thirty seconds of the video specifically shows that to be nonsense.

...or am I misunderstanding you?



posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Another_Nut
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


those are pics of the columns in A warehouse. I never said there weren't columns found.

I said that they arnt ON TOP OF THE DEBRIS PILES.

at aprox 1:30 into your vid there is dust falling DOWN out of the windows(?) of the tower BEFORE it collapsed . That is the concrete floors being turned to dust and gravity pulling it down. I notice the huge plumes erupting from the top also.

can you find pics of this steel on the debris pile? I can't .


So you want photos of the core columns as found on site rather than photos of retrieved core columns? I'm not certain what benefit you see in the distinction, but whatever. Here's another photo of the wreckage at ground zero, and you can clearly still see portions of the exterior facade still standing.

Notice the pile of long, rectangular objects in the lower right section of the photo. Those are core columns, as proven by their being the same length and shape of the previous photos I posted of a core column as well as being in a location where they would be found in relation to the exterior facade.



So your saying you see 60 stories of steel columns in that pic? The pile is barely taller than the firefighters. We are talking about almost 1/3of the entire wtc1 . Not to mention if they did fall you would have steel beams jutting up from the center of the tower as not all of the lower portions would break.



posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Another_Nut

Originally posted by samkent
I think he means the standing remains of the steel core (spire) not the actual antenna mounted to the top of the building.


Yes I do sorry if this was unclear.



Ah, that's the missing piece of the puzzle. In that regard, the second photo showing the core columns lying in a pile shows they had broken up during the collapse, and the recovered component in the first set of photos showed how they broke up- snapped at the joints, bent like a piece of licorice, and because it was hollow, peeled open like a banana- should answer your questions.



posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by commonsense4u
 


The video is now down.. The WTC was collapsed using the hutchison effect. It can destroy metals with vibrations...


The data below seem to strongly tie up with features of what has become known as “The Hutchison Effect”. The Hutchison Effect actually seems to describe a range of observed characteristics, some of which are listed below. John Hutchison is a Canadian inventor and experimental scientist who has been experimenting with “field effects” for almost 30 years. There is a great deal of information about him on the internet, and a selection is linked from this set of pages.



drjudywood.co.uk...



posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 

If you are a Judy Wood fan you might want to watch her in those YT videos.
She comes across as certifiable. IMO



posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


I dont want to get into how yet. First we have to agree that the steel from the spires from both wtc 1 and 2 are absent in the photographic record



posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 01:20 PM
link   
Also note that both spires start just below the points of impact . This is true of both wtc 1 and 2. I suspect that means something but not sure what yet.



posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Another_Nut
So your saying you see 60 stories of steel columns in that pic? The pile is barely taller than the firefighters. We are talking about almost 1/3of the entire wtc1 . Not to mention if they did fall you would have steel beams jutting up from the center of the tower as not all of the lower portions would break.


If you're looking for something that shows ALL the core columns for the ENTIRE structure for BOTH buildings in ONE photo then you're not going to find it because it logically and physically cannot exist. When the building fell it naturally piled wreckage on top of other wreckage so there's no way you can see all the core columns at a time. Your "pics or it didn't happen" adage is not sufficient in this case because unless you're one of those fringe "the towers were fake buildings" conspiracy extremists you're going to have to accept the assumed fact that a 120 floor building in use for 30 years did in fact had enough steel to build 120 floors. It's like relying on "pics or it didn't happen" to refute the assumed fact that underneath the top layer of lava in a volcano there's going to be more lava.

I am going to have to ask you once and for all just what your point is with all of this that a photo of a recovered column and a photo of a pile of columns at ground zero is insufficient to explain. No more beating around the bush, please.



posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Another_Nut
So your saying you see 60 stories of steel columns in that pic? The pile is barely taller than the firefighters. We are talking about almost 1/3of the entire wtc1 . Not to mention if they did fall you would have steel beams jutting up from the center of the tower as not all of the lower portions would break.


If you're looking for something that shows ALL the core columns for the ENTIRE structure for BOTH buildings in ONE photo then you're not going to find it because it logically and physically cannot exist. When the building fell it naturally piled wreckage on top of other wreckage so there's no way you can see all the core columns at a time. Your "pics or it didn't happen" adage is not sufficient in this case because unless you're one of those fringe "the towers were fake buildings" conspiracy extremists you're going to have to accept the assumed fact that a 120 floor building in use for 30 years did in fact had enough steel to build 120 floors. It's like relying on "pics or it didn't happen" to refute the assumed fact that underneath the top layer of lava in a volcano there's going to be more lava.

I am going to have to ask you once and for all just what your point is with all of this that a photo of a recovered column and a photo of a pile of columns at ground zero is insufficient to explain. No more beating around the bush, please.


" when the building fell it narually piled wreckage on top of other wreckage so there's no way you can see all the core columns at a time"

Not true since the spire stood for 14 seconds after the collapse ALL 60 STORIES OF STEEL SHOULD BE ON TOP OF THAT PILE.

if it isn't then we have to agree it went somewhere. But where?

That applies to both towers. There should be nothing on top of those piles but steel beams.

edit on 7-12-2012 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   
Double post . Whoops lol
edit on 7-12-2012 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Another_Nut
 




if it isn't then we have to agree it went somewhere. But where?

In the still frame I see a lot of smoke. Are we just seeing the remaining smoke arter the steel has fallen?
Just because you see a smoke ring somewhere doesn't mean there must be a ring inside the smoke.



posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by Another_Nut
 




if it isn't then we have to agree it went somewhere. But where?

In the still frame I see a lot of smoke. Are we just seeing the remaining smoke arter the steel has fallen?
Just because you see a smoke ring somewhere doesn't mean there must be a ring inside the smoke.


I have no idea what this is in reference to. And I have no clue what that last sentence means. But it may just be me. Please clarify.
edit on 7-12-2012 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Another_Nut

Not true since the spire stood for 14 seconds after the collapse ALL 60 STORIES OF STEEL SHOULD BE ON TOP OF THAT PILE.


Ah, I see what the problem is- you've been listening to those other conspiracy theorists spouting "the towers fell neatly in their footprints" and you don't know you've been had. The sixty stories of steel didn't just accumulate into a tidy neat pile- wreckage was scattered all over the place in every direction, including down into the six level basement. You can see right away from the conditions at ground zero how everything was toppled every which way, and from the angle of this photo it appears to be the same angle as the second one I posted.

Where the sixty stories of steel went is therefore obvious- everywhere.



So, one more time- what is your point?



posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Another_Nut

Not true since the spire stood for 14 seconds after the collapse ALL 60 STORIES OF STEEL SHOULD BE ON TOP OF THAT PILE.


Ah, I see what the problem is- you've been listening to those other conspiracy theorists spouting "the towers fell neatly in their footprints" and you don't know you've been had. The sixty stories of steel didn't just accumulate into a tidy neat pile- wreckage was scattered all over the place in every direction, including down into the six level basement. You can see right away from the conditions at ground zero how everything was toppled every which way, and from the angle of this photo it appears to be the same angle as the second one I posted.

Where the sixty stories of steel went is therefore obvious- everywhere.



So, one more time- what is your point?



First I would like to say ty for debating this with me. If you can show that steel I can be convinced. But can you?

Now for your pic. It clearly show the exterior facade on top of the steel. How could this be?

The spire didn't fall all over the place it fell nearly straight down. That goes for both tower. As evidenced by the video record.

steel doest just blow in the wind. Gravity will pull it down not in any willie nillie direction.

where are the remains of the spire? Not all the beams would have just come apart. The lower portion would have stood and been jutting from the center of the tower. Unless they broke right at the top of the debris pile. But that could only happen if it was falling sideways and snapped at the base. And since the video video clearly shows it falling down not over maybe you can explain how that worked .

The point is If we want to figure out what happened we have to explain the most unusual things that happened that day.
the spires are THE hardest evidence to explain away.



posted on Dec, 8 2012 @ 01:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Another_Nut
If you can show that steel I can be convinced. But can you?


Here is a high res aerial photo taken ten days after the attacks.

It's a massive file, 14MB, but you can zoom right into the middle and see a lot of debris from the spire: long, proportionately thin core columns on top of the middle of the rubble that has not yet been reached by the construction cranes and bulldozers. This is your answer. The core columns of the spire fell down last, and thus landed on top of the other rubble.

I haven't been able to find an earlier shot that wasn't full of smoke obscuring much of the detail shown here. but I'm not going to spend all night on this.



posted on Dec, 8 2012 @ 06:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer

Originally posted by Another_Nut
If you can show that steel I can be convinced. But can you?


Here is a high res aerial photo taken ten days after the attacks.

It's a massive file, 14MB, but you can zoom right into the middle and see a lot of debris from the spire: long, proportionately thin core columns on top of the middle of the rubble that has not yet been reached by the construction cranes and bulldozers. This is your answer. The core columns of the spire fell down last, and thus landed on top of the other rubble.

I haven't been able to find an earlier shot that wasn't full of smoke obscuring much of the detail shown here. but I'm not going to spend all night on this.


Lol I must say I love the fact that you and Dave have 2 different stories. Dave says it's everywhere . You say it right on top.
I will look at your link when I get to a computer. On the phone till sun. and 13 meg is a little big for this phone.lol

I would also like to say that again i never said there wernt columns found. But the amount and where matter.

As you can see from daves pic there is facade on top of the steel beams . But like i said i CAN be convinced. I just wonder if you can too?



posted on Dec, 8 2012 @ 07:43 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 



Try this video...

www.youtube.com...

It tursn into a pile of dust. That is the OPs point.



posted on Dec, 8 2012 @ 07:45 AM
link   
Its hard to find anymore - but this is what my research turned up -
#1. a missplaced TV interview with the captain of the orbiting ISS looking down at NYC --
I ran a voice analyzer (lie detector software) on this youtube - it was Yellow and Red all the way through from start to finish... ?>?> doesnt mean much but the speaker was distressed, possibly deceptive.
#2. I have a friend who was selected to be a Astronault through one of their high school programs - Nasa gave him access to satalite tracking software - it also, displayed where the ISS is at any given time.... about 3 months after I saw this Spire YouTube - we pulled up where the ISS was the morning of 911 - it said it was flying over the horn of Africa at that exact same time - how can it be in two places at once > > ?
#3. Dr. Judy Wood - has finished her work on "Where did the towers go" - you should youtube Dr. Judy Wood.
#4. Weirdo - John Hutchinson - has displayed some technology that if scaled up could produce those results - given access to enough power - and the one thing outer space has is massive amounts of power read for use.'
#5. after both towers were zapped - the machine broke before they could zap WTC 7 - apperantly this was the evidence that was going to prove Ben Laden did it - that building came down without damage at 5:20PM.
#6. Software - fly path into WTC7 required WTC 1 - 2 to be gone and then had a clear flight path into WTC 7.
#7. NIST threatend public safety over the release of the Model Data they used analyize the building collapse of WTC 7. (stated releasing the models would jepardize public safety) on a FOIA request #911 i believe.

not wanting to see any more Americans lives put in harms way .... I did not appeal the NIST's Directors findings.





new topics
top topics
 
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join