First the cap is scattered all over the place and then it proceeds to crush the tower, one floor after the other, pulverizing it to fine dust and a bit of metal.

OoooH - Kaaye

Originally posted by MMC
Here are photos of the WTC's core:

Yes, that photo shows the core area, but it is too distant to identify the steel core columns that were supposed to exist. Here is another image which I found that someone has annotated correctly. "MASSIVE BOX COLUMNS" are shown out side the core. No columns of consequence are seen inside the core. What is seen is elevator guide rail supports or the rail ends.



Those columns are "interior box columns", they are not inside the core. They are against the outside of the concrete shear wall as shown here. This is the only remaining piece of the concrete core walls. People survived in that stairwell because of the concrete.



In the above image, if the steel core columns existed we would see them penetrating the stairwell on the right, we would see them right of that, we would see them in the foreground we would see them in the area labeled "cast concrete core wall". The walls were 2 feet thick at the top and 17 foot thick (narrow axis) at the base. WTC 2 was not a totally shear wall core, It had shear wall within cells that were stacked with heavy hallway floors, more hallways.

You again avoided answering the questions.

Heres another one you avoided.

But we're getting off track here. This thread you started stated that the rebar was coated with C4. Do you really believe that? Whats your evidence?

There were no structural failures at all on 9-11 at the WTC. If you insist on trying to pass off explosions as structural failures with no evidence whatsoever,

You're starting to worry me. YOU have provided zero evidence to support your claim. Zero, except YOUR interpretaion of a couple of pictures.

Heres another question I asked and you repeatedly refused to answer.

What makes your visual interpretation of a few selected pictures more credible than the conclusions of hundreds of trained people working in state of the art facilities using state of the art equipment and time tested and developed methods?

You have no qualifications whatsoever. You've provided not one bit of evidence to support ANY explosive events--other than your guess.

Heres another question you avoid.

Do you really think the the TWC was built with C4 coated rebar? Why in the world would you think that? Wheres you evidence? Please don't say you saw something on PBS 10+ yrs ago. Are you the ONLY person who saw the program and concluded it was telling the world that the WTC was built with C4 coated rebar? Don't you find that kinda odd??

Structural failures look like what MMC posted, not a cloud of expanding concrete debris.

Some do. But you're showing your convoluted reasoning here--You're saying that ALL failures look like that. Surely you're joking.

Is evidence of very well contained high explosives that are also very well distributed. If you cannot recognize this, you have no buisness trying to argue against it

I'm not argueing anything. I'm simply pointing out the the facts bear no resemblence to what you're trying to spew.

It appears you do not want the world to have a feasible, realistic explanation of that event.

C4 coated rebar installed at the time of construction and detonated in 2001 is a "feasible" and "realistic" explanation? Please.

Why do you suppose they didn't detonate them during the attack in '93?]

Originally posted by Long Lance
First the cap is scattered all over the place and then it proceeds to crush the tower, one floor after the other, pulverizing it to fine dust and a bit of metal.

OoooH - Kaaye

What are you talking about?
What do you mean by "First the cap is shattered all over the place and then it proceeds to crush the tower"?

You MUST have seen videos of the collapse. They show NOTHING like what you describe. If you have a video that shows the "cap" exploding and then the collapse, I sure everyone would like to see it.

Originally posted by Vushta

Originally posted by Long Lance
First the cap is scattered all over the place and then it proceeds to crush the tower, one floor after the other, pulverizing it to fine dust and a bit of metal.

OoooH - Kaaye

What are you talking about?
What do you mean by "First the cap is shattered all over the place and then it proceeds to crush the tower"?

You MUST have seen videos of the collapse. They show NOTHING like what you describe. If you have a video that shows the "cap" exploding and then the collapse, I sure everyone would like to see it.

Vushta,

You have seen at least one image showing what is a very well contained explosion causing maximum breakage. If you cannot recognize these events you really have no buisiness trying to argue here. Return with a demolitions expert who can reason these issues.

We all saw the image of the earthquake collapse. It bears no resemblence to the destruction of the towers.

The top of the towers explode from the point upward where they first break to the top as it descends. The delay sequence was set to cover the telltale events of demolition.

Support for the lies that murderers hide behind is a heinous crime against humanity and life on earth at this point. Just want you to know what you are doing.

Originally posted by Vushta
C4 coated rebar installed at the time of construction and detonated in 2001 is a "feasible" and "realistic" explanation? Please

Why do you suppose they didn't detonate them during the attack in '93?]

You are not an demolitions or blasting expert. I may qualify in some areas of expertise, not in others. You have seen images that can only be created by very well contained detonations of high explosive. If you do not know this from looking at the image you cannot reasonably make the argument you are making. You are not reasonable.

THE 1993 BOMB IN THE BASEMENT:

From what I can discern by reading into the defendants discovery processes in the bombing trial, it was shown that the FBI actually lead the bomber to the target in a mock bombing then actually supplanted the fake explosives for real ones. For the actual bombing instructions were given by the FBI to the bomber to park the van away from the core. This could only be to prevent the C4 coated rebar in the core wall from being detonated.
The 1993 event was instead used as a reason for a massive remodel wherein thermite was layered onto available faces of the perimeter columns and interior box columns to be sure as many as possible were removed as support before the mass of debri from above settled to the ground, making room for the pile.

Originally posted by Christophera

Originally posted by Vushta

Originally posted by Long Lance
First the cap is scattered all over the place and then it proceeds to crush the tower, one floor after the other, pulverizing it to fine dust and a bit of metal.

OoooH - Kaaye

What are you talking about?
What do you mean by "First the cap is shattered all over the place and then it proceeds to crush the tower"?

You MUST have seen videos of the collapse. They show NOTHING like what you describe. If you have a video that shows the "cap" exploding and then the collapse, I sure everyone would like to see it.

Vushta,

You have seen at least one image showing what is a very well contained explosion causing maximum breakage. If you cannot recognize these events you really have no buisiness trying to argue here. Return with a demolitions expert who can reason these issues.

We all saw the image of the earthquake collapse. It bears no resemblence to the destruction of the towers.

The top of the towers explode from the point upward where they first break to the top as it descends. The delay sequence was set to cover the telltale events of demolition.

Support for the lies that murderers hide behind is a heinous crime against humanity and life on earth at this point. Just want you to know what you are doing.

Christo.
You're not answering ANY questions just repeating claims with no evidence to back it up.

But maybe I'm jumping the gun here.
What IS your evidence of C4 coated rebar?

Originally posted by Vushta

Christo.
You're not answering ANY questions just repeating claims with no evidence to back it up.

But maybe I'm jumping the gun here.
What IS your evidence of C4 coated rebar?

I've answered all of your questions, but you are not noticing those as well as evidence. Here is the answer to your repeated question.

(post id: 2282162)

Can you produce any evidence of the structure that FEMA says stood? How about a feasible, realistic explanation for rates of fall near free fall?

[edit on 17-6-2006 by Christophera]

Originally posted by Vushta
What do you mean by "symmetrically"?

I mean it fell straight down with no part of the building falling to one side, other than debris blasted out and away from the building.
No building EVER has fallen straight down from anything but controlled explosives.
Accidental destruction (i.e. not controlled) are never neat and symmetrical, they are chaotic and unpredictable. Yet we have THREE, say that again THREE buildings in one day do exactly that. What are the odds for a physically impossible act to do that?

There was nothing "natural" about huge frickin' planes with full loads of fuel flying at full speed directly into the buildings. What are you talking about?

You're missing the point, a natural collpase as aposed to a controlled one.
And why so angry? What do you care that much what I frickin think?

As opposed to what?

Huh? A none controlled demo, i.e. random bombs, fires, plane impacts...You get it yet

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by Vushta
There was nothing "natural" about huge frickin' planes with full loads of fuel flying at full speed directly into the buildings. What are you talking about?

You're missing the point, a natural collpase as aposed to a controlled one.
And why so angry? What do you care that much what I frickin think?

Huh? A none controlled demo, i.e. random bombs, fires, plane impacts...You get it yet

Vushta is engaging in psychological acrobatics to complete a distortion, "miniimization", "all or nothing" thinking is facilitated by this. Vushta has concocted a collision that is quite a bit more devastating to the towers than the real thing.

Frank Demartini's Statement

Frank A. Demartini, on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, spoke of the resilience of the towers in an interview recorded on January 25, 2001.
The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door -- this intense grid -- and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.

Demartini, who had an office on the 88th floor of the North Tower, has been missing since the 9/11/01 attack, having remained in the North Tower to assist in the evacuation.