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: 8
1
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 23 2006 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark

Originally posted by Christophera
Questions about your concern for our rights under our Constitution do not constitute an ad-hominem attack. Your inabilty to address the compromises to our rights and freedoms does far more damage to you than anything I've said. Show how your refusal to deal rationally with available information protects our Constitution.


Er Ok, whatever you say, Chris. BTW, have you stopped beating your wife yet?


I asked first. Support the tower core you assert stood.


Don’t take this the wrong way, but is English your native language? Seriously, I have a hard time understanding what you are trying to say sometimes.



Why do no steel columns protrude from the center area of the core of WTC 2? Your attempt to evade this question by stating that this picture is inadequate in not reasonable. Silhouetted vertical elements would be visible in it if they existed.


Maybe, maybe not. You are laboring under the false impression that the core framing was self supporting. It was not. There was no lateral bracing for the core columns, thus they would not have been able to stand without the surrounding floor diaphragms to stabilize them.



Now my question.

Also, why are no steel columns seen piercing the stairs, why are none seen to the right of the stairs where elevators were?


Please define what you mean by “piercing the stairs.”

Where are the stairs in that photo?


What core framing?

You feign confusion to enable selectivity not logical and attempt through cognitive distortions to create emotional reasoning in the viewer. You are acting as a disinformation agent.

Let me try to inspire a little emotional reasoning with the reality of what you work to hide and ignore with your irresponsible ridicule.

There are children out there who do not know if the mother or father they lost who worked in WTC over impact, died from injuries, smoke or fire or like hamburger in the demolition or as a jumper.

There are fire fighters that mourn their devoted friends lost who were denied due process. They and ground zero workers are dying from cancer contracted in an atmospheric toxic soup.

Tell us a little about your love for our rights and freedom and how you expect your actions here to protect them and our futures.




posted on May, 23 2006 @ 09:59 PM
link   
WOW, talk about obfustication, Chris, you just took the prize.


Are you going to address the subject at all, or are you going to keep trying to divert the subject?



posted on May, 23 2006 @ 10:54 PM
link   
cindy sheehan got into the state of the union chambers, immediately prior to the address.

she camped outside president bush's ranch for how long?

we've had some of the biggest protests in this country ever as a result of the invasion of iraq. we've had some of the biggest protests ever as a result of the immigration debate.

people still make anti bush songs. dixie chicks keep saying what theyre saying. that rapper said bush blew down the "towers" or whatever he said exactly.

the world of academia is incredibly anti establishment, anti us govt. ward churchill, anyone?

the rolling stones have a song about neo cons. tom delonge of blink 182 said 911 needs to be opened again or something to that effect. www.911blogger.com...


i see advertisements on tv for al gores "an inconvenient truth" movie.

farenheit 911 made millions

people are still totally free to speak out

i dont know, i just have a hard time swallowing the "our rights are being ripped up right in front of us" argument when i see all the stuff i mentioned, and more. its a weak argument, christophera.



[edit on 23-5-2006 by blatantblue]

[edit on 23-5-2006 by blatantblue]



posted on May, 23 2006 @ 10:59 PM
link   
Yeah, probably this isn't the right thread for that kind of rant, BlatantMoo.

[Mod edit - Please review this link EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY... ALL MEMBERS PLEASE READ]

[edit on 23/5/2006 by Umbrax]



posted on May, 23 2006 @ 11:05 PM
link   
[Content removed]

seriously. the guy keeps bringing up rights and freedoms.

"Why are you trying to hide the way Americans were murdered? Do the rights and freedoms of Americans mean anything to you? Only truth will protect them."

"Questions about your concern for our rights under our Constitution do not constitute an ad-hominem attack. Your inabilty to address the compromises to our rights and freedoms does far more damage to you than anything I've said. Show how your refusal to deal rationally with available information protects our Constitution."

"Tell us a little about your love for our rights and freedom and how you expect your actions here to protect them and our futures."

[Content removed]

if people dont want this stuff to be brought up, Communication Master, then he shouldnt keep bringing up our rights and freedoms to howard rowark. ive only addressed that which was already brought up in this thread. what dont you understand about that? ANYTHING MENTIONED ON A THREAD, ESPECIALLY WHEN MENTIONED OVER AND OVER. IS FAIR GAME! Can you comprehend that, you "master" of communication?

so just get off the thread, please. he can respond if he wants. if not, then # what i said and they can talk about other things.

and blatantmoo?

[Content removed]

get off this thread; if ATS admins needed a new moderator, they would ask for one.
pull your head out of your pretentious ass.

[Content removed]





NOTE: Christophera, you can either address what I said, and thats fine. That will be that. Or you can Howard can keep discussing.




[edit on 23-5-2006 by blatantblue]

[Mod edit - Please review this link EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY... ALL MEMBERS PLEASE READ]

[edit on 23/5/2006 by Umbrax]



posted on May, 23 2006 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by blatantblue
[Content removed]

seriously. the guy keeps bringing up rights and freedoms.

"Why are you trying to hide the way Americans were murdered? Do the rights and freedoms of Americans mean anything to you? Only truth will protect them."

"Questions about your concern for our rights under our Constitution do not constitute an ad-hominem attack. Your inabilty to address the compromises to our rights and freedoms does far more damage to you than anything I've said. Show how your refusal to deal rationally with available information protects our Constitution."


Clearly Christophera was refering to American rights being violated when their own Government attacked them or allowed them to be attacked. He's not talking about Cindy sheehan, or songs that ridicule Bush. The title of this thread reads 'The Big FEMA Lie, The Towers Had A Concrete Core: PROOF'. This might give you an indication as to what he was getting at. This isn't a police state thread, or a recent OP/ED by SkepticOverlord.


Originally posted by blatantblue
written throughout the past two pages in this thread. he keeps asking this to howard rowark, so i decided to address it myself. problem? [Content removed]


I can read, thank you kindly.



Originally posted by blatantblue
if people dont want this stuff to be brought up, Communication Master, then he shouldnt keep bringing up our rights and freedoms to howard rowark. ive only addressed what was brought up


No, you've addressed what you thought was brought up, which was pretty much wrong.



Originally posted by blatantblue
and blatantmoo?

[Content removed]

[edit on 23-5-2006 by blatantblue]

[edit on 23-5-2006 by blatantblue]

[edit on 23-5-2006 by blatantblue]


Alright, calm down now. There's no need to get quite so upset. Initially, I had thought you had posted in the wrong thread, and was only trying to help

I know now that you were just confused.

P.S. Isn't it annoying when people try to play Mod?









[edit on 24/5/2006 by Umbrax]

[edit on 24-5-2006 by Communication_Monster]



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 02:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by blatantblue

seriously. the guy keeps bringing up rights and freedoms.

"Why are you trying to hide the way Americans were murdered? Do the rights and freedoms of Americans mean anything to you? Only truth will protect them."

"Questions about your concern for our rights under our Constitution do not constitute an ad-hominem attack. Your inabilty to address the compromises to our rights and freedoms does far more damage to you than anything I've said. Show how your refusal to deal rationally with available information protects our Constitution."

"Tell us a little about your love for our rights and freedom and how you expect your actions here to protect them and our futures."

[Content removed]

if people dont want this stuff to be brought up, Communication Master, then he shouldnt keep bringing up our rights and freedoms to howard rowark. ive only addressed that which was already brought up in this thread. what dont you understand about that? ANYTHING MENTIONED ON A THREAD, ESPECIALLY WHEN MENTIONED OVER AND OVER. IS FAIR GAME! Can you comprehend that, you "master" of communication?

so just get off the thread, please. he can respond if he wants. if not, then # what i said and they can talk about other things.

and blatantmoo?

[Content removed]

get off this thread; if ATS admins needed a new moderator, they would ask for one.
pull your head out of your pretentious ass.

[Content removed]


NOTE: Christophera, you can either address what I said, and thats fine. That will be that. Or you can Howard can keep discussing.


[edit on 23-5-2006 by blatantblue]


We need a moderator to deal with baseless and irrational denial, not to tell us to not call each other names. I use our rights and name calling as a tool, and it works. It is not pleasant for anybody to read unless they know what I'm doing and why. There is nothing pleasant about 9-11. These deniers have no evidence to support their assertions, then they ignore actual evidence. Those seeking real knowledge do not know how to qualify evidence by constructing valid scenarios, the obsfucations are professionally designed. These people are paid to do this. I've seen them working together, I've been set up with doctored images and down loaded bugs. I see them on other boards doing spam ralleys. They make it look halfway ligit and bury all the valuable information within insiginificant crap.

This behavior has cost us the last 5 years of inaction. The confusion this kind of garbage creates does real damage. We can and will loose this democracy, it is not far off that nothing will matter.

Get ready for deep hardship and struggle or worse if we cannot agree. There is a great deal I would like to share that would create much understanding and some here could handle it, but in an environment such as these disinfos create it will only be ridiculed and diminished in its value. The mods need to recognize sincerity and get rid of the unsincere, pronto. They need to recognize sincerity tests and support their usage.

Make people justify their positions with facts and logic and when your not sure about the exact data, post a thread for the sincere who might know or can figure it out or to chew on it. Create a forum for insignificant facts that cannot be relinquished but also cannot be allowed to obscure relative, high priority discussion focusing on real action items and move the "call phone" 'atta passport" stuff there.

Or if all that is too much, find investors for a bb software I've concieved of that allows the users to effectively moderate their own threads. I call it "Poll to Post" forum. In order to post you have to respond to a poll. The poll is somewhat complex and arbitrary but I feel the sincere will work out a system of ratings to apply to posts that will work.

algoxy.com...



[edit on 24-5-2006 by Christophera]



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 11:59 AM
link   
Chistophera, you should read up on common fallacies used in arguments.

In particular you have attempted to create a red herring by presenting an appeal to consequences wrapped up in an appeal to emotion and an appeal to fear.


Originally posted by Christophera
We need a moderator to deal with baseless and irrational denial, not to tell us to not call each other names.


In other words, you favor moderating people’s ideas and beliefs as opposed to just enforcing a few rules of civility.


Originally posted by Christophera
I use our rights and name calling as a tool, and it works.


You don’t have the “right” to violate the terms of the terms and conditions that you agreed to when you registered to use this forum.



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 12:11 PM
link   
Anyway, back to the subject. Chris, I’d like to discuss these 17 foot thick walls with you. Since the whole of the core area was taken up by elevator shafts, utility shafts, toilets and stairwells, where exactly did they hide these 17 foot thick walls? Were the walls tapered on the inside or the outside of the core, or were they evenly tapered on both sides?



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark
Anyway, back to the subject. Chris, I’d like to discuss these 17 foot thick walls with you. Since the whole of the core area was taken up by elevator shafts, utility shafts, toilets and stairwells, where exactly did they hide these 17 foot thick walls? Were the walls tapered on the inside or the outside of the core, or were they evenly tapered on both sides?


I'm not discussing the core with you. I'm informing you about it and you are rejecting the information without basis. You are trying to make the verified information go away, dismiss it. If you come back and say "no" without raw evidence supporting that is consistent with structural knowledge of concrete and steel you should be banned for 2 weeks.

I've actually already explained most of it. This takes care of some of the rest.

algoxy.com...

The core had parallel walls in the interior 80 x 120 feet. Walls on the long axis were 15 foot thick at the base and 17 feet on the short axis. All sides tapered on the outside.

All reading: Realize NO ONE has made howie accountable for answering my question.



If the core was constructed from multiple steel core columns, why are they not visible in this image? Your explanation should be consistent with logic related to the exact reasons you give for the non appearance of steel columns in ALL images of the core area over ground level.

Failure to provide an answer to this should get you banned permanently because you are now acting as though you are entitled to the answer to the question you now ask as if most of it hasn't been answered and you have evaded answering this question.

Let us see if mods can use reason and power to protect rights and freedom.



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 02:00 PM
link   
Anyone have a drawing of where the elevator shafts and duct shafts were in the core structure? I have drawn these 17 foot walls on a drawing of the floor plan I had done in the past and this is what I've come up with so far. The thick lines are where the concrete would end at 17 foot offset from the exterior core columns.

files.abovetopsecret.com...(1).pdf

It's interesting to see that the walls almost line up with the inner columns. I'm NOT agreeing with the 17 foot thick walls, just pointing out that it is interesting. As a note, the inner column spacing was interpolated by me from NIST data, so they could even be closer or farther away than they appear in my drawing.

I'm basically trying this to see if it (the 17 foot walls) have enough room for all the duct working and elevator shafts. At first glance it doesn't seem to, but until I have the data, I will not speculate.



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 02:45 PM
link   
en.wikipedia.org...:World_Trade_Center_Building_Design_with_Floor_and_Elevator_Arrangment.jpg

So, to make that work, the inside of the core would have to be vertical and the outside would have to be sloped inward. Thus the half the distance from the outer walls to the core on the long axis of the core would be taken up by this phantom 17’ thick concrete wall.


This would eat up almost 30% of the rentable space on the lower floors.



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Christophera
Now my question.

Also, why are no steel columns seen piercing the stairs, why are none seen to the right of the stairs where elevators were?


Please define what you mean by “piercing the stairs.”

Where are the stairs in that photo?

Answer the questions, and I'll answer yours.

[edit on 24-5-2006 by HowardRoark]



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 02:57 PM
link   
I re-drew my drawing with the 17 foot walls on the outside of the core. You are correct Howard, these walls would take up way too much of the rentable space on the lower floors. here's my drawing. Note: the trusses have been removed for clarity sake.

files.abovetopsecret.com...(2).pdf

edit: That is 9,158 square foot loss per floor of rentable space.

[edit on 5/24/2006 by Griff]



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 03:29 PM
link   



Originally posted by HowardRoark


Originally posted by Christophera
Now my question.

Also, why are no steel columns seen piercing the stairs, why are none seen to the right of the stairs where elevators were?


Please define what you mean by “piercing the stairs.”

Where are the stairs in that photo?

Answer the questions, and I'll answer yours.

[edit on 24-5-2006 by HowardRoark]



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff
I re-drew my drawing with the 17 foot walls on the outside of the core. You are correct Howard, these walls would take up way too much of the rentable space on the lower floors. here's my drawing. Note: the trusses have been removed for clarity sake.

files.abovetopsecret.com...(2).pdf

edit: That is 9,158 square foot loss per floor of rentable space.

[edit on 5/24/2006 by Griff]


Can you determine which face of which tower core this is? The file name, lobby_s.jpg indicates the south tower.





posted on May, 24 2006 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Christophera



So, you are saying that people had to walk through some kind of corridor back 17 feet to get to the elevator? Because we all know that the elevators shafts wouldn't be tappered also. Either that or they had to walk through a 17 foot concrete wall? Anyone been there? Did you have to walk through a 17 foot corridor or wall?



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 04:11 PM
link   
[removed unnecessary quote of Entire preceeding post]


This what disinformation is like folks. Griff now is trying to say I tried to say something I did not and the answer has already been posted.

Christophera
posted on 24-5-2006 at 01:40 PM Post Number: 2201716 (post id: 2226752)

The core had parallel walls in the interior 80 x 120 feet. Walls on the long axis were 15 foot thick at the base and 17 feet on the short axis. All sides tapered on the outside.


The disinformation tactic is to pretend to be confused, don't use evidence, not bother reading, do not answer questions and always work together to make it look like truth seekers should answer the same questions over and over and if they don't, act like there is something wrong with the only realistic and feasible explanation for free fall in existence.

algoxy.com...

[edit on 24-5-2006 by Christophera]

Mod Edit: Quoting – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 5/24/2006 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Christophera
Stairwell On Right - Piercing Means "Penetrating"




1) I don't see anything that I can identify as a stairwell.

2) Why do you think a steel column would or wouldn't penetrate the stairwell area during a collapse?

It is apparent that that photograph was taken after considerable debris removal had already taken place. How can anyone make any meaningfull inferences from that?



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 04:51 PM
link   
Howie, you need to answer my question NOW.

If you do not understand the image or the language, stop trying to deny what is obvious.

NOW, answer my question.



Why are no steel core columns seen in the core area. Your answer must be consistent and detailed with the technologies that might explain the abcense.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join