It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Big FEMA Lie, The Towers Had A Concrete Core: PROOF

page: 13
1
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 01:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark
Look really closely at the image on the left

You can see that that is the original bearing end which was milled smooth at the mill.

The columns were spliced together with splice plates. You can see the edge of the splice plate on the top and especially on the bottom of the column where the debris has caught on it.


No plates used. No bolt holes here or in the many other pictures that can be found showing these square cut ends. The lack of them in the ground zero image indicates joints were not plated. No such plates are seen in other ground zero images.

These sheared columns were butt welded 100% in position. Below is an image showing a butt weld. Just to the right of the intersection along the interior box collumn is an area with a different texture. You can see it goes on 2 sides or all the way around and is not related to the joint with the floor beams.



That is a piece of interior box column from near the top of the tower. I say WTC 1 because there are 4 floor beams intersecting. The extreme flattening against the floor beams that was parallel to the core face (top left to lower right) of the other 2 (bot. left & top right) occured when the core walls exploded. Explosive shearing was not done every floor it appears.

Here is a link to t cut in steel done with an LSC

www.air-and-space.com...

To see how the above piece of interior box column fits into the tower, Examine,

concretecore.741.com...

and notice the silhouette images of the towers. The explanation of the midday silhouette shows that upper part of WTC 1 had the interior box column perhaps 12 feet horizontally away from the top of the tubular concrete core shear wall. Wall was tapered and column was plumb. Given the appearance and width of the ground surface at the butt weld I would say that tube is extruded (rather than hand fabbed lower) and perhaps has a 3/4 inch wall thickness which would put it at about the 90th floor maybe.




posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wizy
Why not file an FOIA and force the company to reveal?


How ie's right, only government agencies are legally held responsive to FOIA. And one doesn' t "file" FOIA. One serves a letter with a request wherein a clock starts ticking, then if there is no response, you can sue. If you have lot's of money you might find a lawyer to follow up on it, but there's been no success in getting the WTC documents using those laws. The PA say that the mayor took them and the courts won't make him release them.

www.nyclu.org...

[edit on 3-6-2006 by Christophera]



posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Christophera

Originally posted by Wizy
Why not file an FOIA and force the company to reveal?


How ie's right, only government agencies are legally held responsive to FOIA. And one doesn' t "file" FOIA. One serves a letter with a request wherein a clock starts ticking, then if there is no response, you can sue. If you have lot's of money you might find a lawyer to follow up on it, but there's been no success in getting the WTC documents using those laws. The PA say that the mayor took them and the courts won't make him release them.

www.nyclu.org...

[edit on 3-6-2006 by Christophera]


So Christophera, what did the engineering and architect firm of the WTC towers say when you asked what the building was made of?



posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 10:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wizy

Originally posted by Christophera

Originally posted by Wizy
Why not file an FOIA and force the company to reveal?


How ie's right, only government agencies are legally held responsive to FOIA. And one doesn' t "file" FOIA. One serves a letter with a request wherein a clock starts ticking, then if there is no response, you can sue. If you have lot's of money you might find a lawyer to follow up on it, but there's been no success in getting the WTC documents using those laws. The PA say that the mayor took them and the courts won't make him release them.

www.nyclu.org...

[edit on 3-6-2006 by Christophera]


So Christophera, what did the engineering and architect firm of the WTC towers say when you asked what the building was made of?



I didn't even have to ask. The engineer volenteered this information just recently.

Leslie E. Robertson
Posted: Apr 1 2006, 06:33 PM
Unregistered

Christophera is correct in stating that the Twin Towers were constructed with a concrete core. Although in my original design the core was to be a steel framed one that decision was overridden by Minoru Yamasaki the architect.

That core should have resisted the airplane impacts AND the fires. I have said nothing for four and a half years but can remain silent no longer. My belief is that only explosives could have caused WTC 1 & WTC 2 to collapse the way they did on September 11, 2001.

Leslie E. Robertson
Director Leslie E. Robertson Associates, R.L.L.P. and lead engineer of the World Trade Center


forum.physorg.com...



posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 11:21 PM
link   
Come on, man. What are you doing?

I would be suspect of Robertson posting something like that on a forum on any day, let alone April 1st. Unless you have something to show conclusively that Robertson typed that up and submitted it himself, I think it would benefit a move for truth that you don't push it as if you already know Robertson in fact posted it.

You're not going to get any real source information by petitioning these guys, Wizy. Try it yourself if you don't believe me. Anyone can try.



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 12:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
Come on, man. What are you doing?

I would be suspect of Robertson posting something like that on a forum on any day, let alone April 1st. Unless you have something to show conclusively that Robertson typed that up and submitted it himself, I think it would benefit a move for truth that you don't push it as if you already know Robertson in fact posted it.

You're not going to get any real source information by petitioning these guys, Wizy. Try it yourself if you don't believe me. Anyone can try.


Yea' it's weak, ......... but we've already been over this issue of calling the engineers up and getting information from them, or any other way for that matter.

And you know, it's true, I didn't ask for it and If you were Robertson and felt as though your life was threatened if you revealed the true structure but wanted contribute with limited risk, at age 78, that's what you, or I might do.

Wizy should be using the evidence on other, impartial people and asking if they can make the simple comparisons.

FEMA



REALITY



No resembelance.


[edit on 4-6-2006 by Christophera]



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 01:24 AM
link   
Please provide contact information on this engineer, and what his role was in the contstruction and retrofitting of the WTC towers.



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wizy


Please provide contact information on this engineer, and what his role was in the contstruction and retrofitting of the WTC towers.


Please provide more information in your request for information.



Or, in the alternative, if you are referrring to Robertson, check the history on the WTC and you will find he is the lead engineer on the tower design and development.

[edit on 4-6-2006 by Christophera]



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Does anyone have a video showing what happens before and after that still shot?

It would be nice to know how long that stood and it might show whether or not that standing peice is the core.



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeftBehind
Does anyone have a video showing what happens before and after that still shot?


I've seen one, but all you see is basically the tip of it sticking out of a smoke cloud closer to the ground. Apparently someone was just snapping individual photos. Hard to tell, based on that, how long it took to fall, but it couldn't have taken too very long.


and it might show whether or not that standing peice is the core.


What else might it be? Floor slabs? Perimeter columns?



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

What else might it be? Floor slabs? Perimeter columns?


It has to be, because if it was anything else, it would totally shatter the pancake theory.



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeftBehind
Does anyone have a video showing what happens before and after that still shot?

It would be nice to know how long that stood and it might show whether or not that standing peice is the core.


Here is the shot immediately afterwards.



Here is the original series of images the shot just before.



posted on Jun, 5 2006 @ 02:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Masisoar

Originally posted by bsbray11

What else might it be? Floor slabs? Perimeter columns?


It has to be, because if it was anything else, it would totally shatter the pancake theory.


It is a steel reinforced cast concrete tube, shear wall construction.

Here is a view of the WTC 1 spire. An end view of the concrete sear wall is seen.



Here is a zoom of it with notation.



The pancake theory has no basis after the true core is understood as it is seen in raw images.



posted on Jun, 5 2006 @ 11:59 AM
link   
I've been asking for how ie to provide some raw evidence, images of the multiple steel core columns he asserts existed but none is forth coming.

Without that it is totally prudent to assume no such raw evidence can ever be produced and the the concrete core is indeed a fact that can be shared without hesitation to further our recovery of our rights, our freedoms and protect our Constitution.

Why waste futher time on this nonsense?



posted on Jun, 5 2006 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Christophera
I've been asking for how ie to provide some raw evidence, images of the multiple steel core columns he asserts existed but none is forth coming.


I’m sorry, What were these things sticking up again?










Originally posted by Christophera
Why waste futher time on this nonsense?


Yes, tell us why you keep insisting on this concrete core nonsense.



posted on Jun, 5 2006 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark

Originally posted by Christophera
I've been asking for how ie to provide some raw evidence, images of the multiple steel core columns he asserts existed but none is forth coming.


I’m sorry, What were these things sticking up again?



The steel inside is too small. This is the same image zoomed and notated of INTERIOR BOX COLUMNS. Ironically I did not do the notation. It came from a site that thought the core was multiple steel columns. However, they were honest and only labeled the columns visible that are "massive box columns". The steel inside is elevator guide rail or its support.

I've posted this before but you continue to assert core columns are visible. Your evidence and statement do not have the direct qualities that my statement and evidence have, or the corroboration. Very clearly below, no steel columns protrude.




Originally posted by HowardRoark




Originally posted by Christophera
Why waste further time on this nonsense?


Yes, tell us why you keep insisting on this concrete core nonsense.


The above image explains nothing. It is selective use of evidence suggesting that we ignore that inside the core area no columns are seen, and we are not even looking directly at it. The columns around the outside are interior box columns. The concrete could be as far as 70 feet below the top floor in construction photos.

My image is from the demolition and clearly shows a structure that can only be concrete, and I have other photos as well. Your evidence does not qualify as being what you say it is.

Find raw images from the demolition to show us the steel core columns in the core are above ground. Ther are plenty of images that show the core area, if the stel core columns existed, you should be able to find an image showing them. I mean there were supposed to be 47 of the things and they were 1300 feet long.



posted on Jun, 6 2006 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Christophera
The steel inside is elevator guide rail or its support.


Talk about selective interpretation of the data.

BTW, did you miss this post on the elevator guide rail issue?

Sauron makes a very good point. Why would they expose the machined surfaces of the elevator guide rails to the elements?



posted on Jun, 6 2006 @ 11:57 AM
link   
Here are some photos to help either side of the argument out:










posted on Jun, 6 2006 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark

Originally posted by Christophera
The steel inside is elevator guide rail or its support.


Talk about selective interpretation of the data.

BTW, did you miss this post on the elevator guide rail issue?

Sauron makes a very good point. Why would they expose the machined surfaces of the elevator guide rails to the elements?


No. I do not talk about selective interpretation of data. Try not to distort the statements of others. You are talking about "selective interpretation" of data. I talk about selective uses of data. You only will use the data that you select and it is not consistent with other data. Meaning you are trying to unethically manipulate the facts with the data you use.

How do we know they exposed the guide rails to the elements? The rail surface might not be applied until the supports for it are in. A little rust is not a big deal in that application anyway.

[edit on 6-6-2006 by Christophera]



posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by LeftBehind
Does anyone have a video showing what happens before and after that still shot?


I've seen one, but all you see is basically the tip of it sticking out of a smoke cloud closer to the ground. Apparently someone was just snapping individual photos. Hard to tell, based on that, how long it took to fall, but it couldn't have taken too very long.


and it might show whether or not that standing peice is the core.


What else might it be? Floor slabs? Perimeter columns?


It is the core. If the core were steel columns with drywall sheeting making elevator shafts and stairwells, (absurd) the fall of all the debri would have stripped of the outer drywall and we would have a more rectangular edged sihouette. This image is very clear to me, even without zooming it.



For fall times the videos are really the only way, but you cannot see the debri hit the ground so it won't be exact and do not give into pressure to create discussion focused on exact fall times. That is a key strategy of the psyops disinfo campaign, keep the conversation focused on valid information/discussion, ............. that is not critical.

Hence my focus on the concrete core. It is a safe mihop for an official if the oficial is secure in their presentation of image analysis as to structure type. It really is that simple. We can do it and if we get enough average peple to identify it and say why it will become reality. This is why there is so much resistence to the concrete core.

concretecore.741.com...



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join