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 Proof Is In The Core

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 12:50 PM
link   
I've been thinking about this for a few days now and want to see what other's opinions are.

We all have seen the pictures of the North Tower's spire standing for some time after the building fell right. Well, at that point in time, this spire was attached to itself so as to act like a tree. Now, why did the spire fall into itself when it should have fallen over like a tree? What made this spire detach from itself in mid air when the "forces" that suppossedly broke the towers apart are not there anymore? I could see the building debris severing the bottom of the spire at the last minute but what broke the spire apart in mid air? Because if the building debris did sever it at the bottom, it should have toppled like a tree. The only thing I can think of that would do this is thermite that didn't have a chance to burn through yet and at the last minute did. There is not much else that would make this phenomenon happen. Can anyone else come up with a scenario of how the spire disintegrated in mid air when the forces of the building falling have already past?




posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 12:59 PM
link   
It could have been many things according to the Government:

1. Sulphur in the drywall + the iron colums rusting + aluminum from the airplane made a spontaneous thermate reaction.

2. Electrical transformers exploded.

3. Gas canisters in the kitchens of the WTC exploded.

4. Jet fuel ran down the elevator shafts, onto the colums and weakend the steel, hence a collapse.

5. One word: pancake

6. Mutli-vectored gravity.

7. Wind shear.

8. Magic.

9. Box cutters.

10. Rescue crews cut it.

11. Cheney farted.



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 01:05 PM
link   
None of those actually explain how the spire was strong enough to withstand the forces of the failure to ultimately disintegrate upon itself. Remember that the forces of the building collapsing have already past this part of the spire but suddenly it falls in on itself. This shouldn't have happened IMO. It should have toppled over like a tree.

BTW, I do know you were being sarcastic Slap Nuts.



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff
Now, why did the spire fall into itself when it should have fallen over like a tree? What made this spire detach from itself in mid air when the "forces" that suppossedly broke the towers apart are not there anymore?


Your questions are very pertinent, touching on 2 issues. What is the spire? Examimation of 2 images determines where and what it is. The construction image of the steel framework, the outer tube of the"tube in a tube construction" has an inner wall made of heavy, hand fabricated "interior box columns". Their position outside the concrete shear wall of the core is shown by the single remaining piece of the core wall at its base.

The page,

algoxy.com...

deals with the 2nd issue, demolition. It explains a fully feasible and realistic method to create rates of fall near free fall and pulverization. One simply has to understand that what we saw is not possible with absolutely optimzed placement and distribution of high explosives. This may be very difficult for some, but still, these events must be reasonably explained.
The buildings were built to demolish. The explosives used were some of the most potent and safe that have ever existed, C4. The cold war inspired self destruct sub bases and missile silos which was utilized in secret during construction.

The spire is an interior box column which falls immediately before this image which shows many fine vertical elements having a slight curve in a series from the same camera. So fine they almost fail to resolve in the photo. The spire photo provides scale, we can only identify those vertical elements as rebar.

algoxy.com...

The spire fell how it did and when it did because the explosive placed at construction were inadvertantly exposed to air, oxidized, evaporated and lost their viability. Other, lower, horizontal rebar contingently, redundantly connected into the delay circuits, eventually detonated, bringing down the spire but leaving the large high tensile steel rebar to stand momentarily.


[edit on 26-6-2006 by Christophera]



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 09:32 AM
link   
Chris,

Can you give me some examples of these explosives being built into buildings? Even if it is a missle silo. I want to be able to verify that this could be a possibility. I believe you when you say that you have experience in explosives and all but it's hard to just take someone's word for it on an internet forum. Thanks.

Also, notice how none of the "debunkers" have come in this thread yet. Funny how no-one can explain the sudden breakdown of the welds for the spire after all forces of the building have gone past.



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 10:06 AM
link   
I've ignored this thread because personally I don't see any significance in whats trying to be put forth.

What IS the point? Why does it seem like an anomoly that the "spire" stood for a while after collapse?



Funny how no-one can explain the sudden breakdown of the welds for the spire after all forces of the building have gone past.


What "sudden breakdown? Yes, most of the dramatic visible forces of the collapse were recently past, the EFFECTS of those forces and the collapse were not.

Again, I'm at a loss to grasp what exactly is being implied here. Are you saying that the remaining spire was "blown" after the rest of the collapse and thats how the welds were failed? Did anyone witness this? I have zero information on the "spire" and its standing after the collapse. How long did it stand? How tall was it? What damage did it suffer in the collapse? How far off of its natural COV was it etc.?



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 10:50 AM
link   
The point I'm making is that the spire (columns that were still attached to each other) stood after the building around it was already to the ground. Now, what would make this spire disintegrate into itself instead of fall over like a tree? Since it was already together after the building fell, the forces of the falling building couldn't effect it anymore, therefore something else caused it to collapse into itself. Can you explain what could have caused these huge columns to come apart after the buildings forces have past?


Again, I'm at a loss to grasp what exactly is being implied here.


Then you aren't listening for some reason.


Are you saying that the remaining spire was "blown" after the rest of the collapse and thats how the welds were failed?


No, I'm saying that these columns were huge and that part of the thermite reaction took a little longer than the rest. Or can you give me another scenario of how these welds just mysteriously became detached?


Did anyone witness this?


Everyone who has seen the spire stand for a minute then mysteriously fall into itself instead of toppling like a tree.


I have zero information on the "spire" and its standing after the collapse.


Then I suggest you re-read Christophera's thread about the concrete core. Not that I'm advocating what he has to say but there are plenty of pictures of the spire and core structure from both towers.


How long did it stand?


Not sure exactly but it stood after the surrounding building, then suddenly collapses into itself.


How tall was it?


Again not sure but it is clearly above the surrounding buildings.


What damage did it suffer in the collapse?


Obviously not enough to tear it apart as it stood. But then to suddenly rip apart at the end doesn't make sense. It should have toppled like a tree.


How far off of its natural COV was it etc.?


That's the point. It should have toppled like a tree. That's the main point of this thread, that it should have toppled but instead fell into itself.

I'll try and post some pictures and/or video so people who don't know anything about the spire or core structure can join in. BTW, I'm surprised to hear you say that you haven't heard of the spire or core structure standing because I know for a fact you've been around long enough in these threads to see this.

Here's one link of the spire. sf.indymedia.org...

For some reason, I can't see the pictures but at the end, they show a video of the spire collapse. Edited: BTW, I didn't even realize that this site is sayiong the same thing I'm saying until just now while I was seeing if the pictures would come up. Meaning...this is my own original theory and I did NOT get this idea from this or anyother website.

Here are some pictures





[edit on 6/27/2006 by Griff]

[edit on 6/27/2006 by Griff]



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 12:35 PM
link   
Hey Griff,

I can totally understand your point of view on this matter as it is very questionable. One thing to note is that, this obviously still had structural integrity as it still is remaining upright even after the building had collapsed and fallen to the ground, until its demise.

How it fell is a good question. Did it break in half? Did it tip over? From the pictures I've seen provided on this forum, I've seen no indication of a huge top heavy load on the top the remaining structure that would simply come down upon the rest of the structure fueled by the force of gravity to take it out.

Definately a point to prove.

What does the otherside of the table have to say?

It's always a good point to look at all aspects of the collapse, however small. Haha, I guess you can say we're trying to do the NIST's job FOR them.

[edit on 6/27/2006 by Masisoar]



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 12:45 PM
link   
I'm not sure what the other side has to say. Only one "debunker" has commented on it so far and really didn't give an explaination. So your guess is as good as mine. If you watch the video on that one link, you can see it disintegrate into itself. I'm not sure if it fell into a couple pieces or many pieces. My main point is that since it was already structurally sound, that it should have toppled like a tree not disintegrated upon itself like it did.

If anyone who reads this has the photo of the spire close up that shows what some believe to be thermite traces on the ends, can you please post it? I'm having trouble finding that and I have some comments about that also.



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 12:46 PM
link   


The point I'm making is that the spire (columns that were still attached to each other) stood after the building around it was already to the ground.


That doesn't strike me as particularly unusual.



Now, what would make this spire disintegrate into itself instead of fall over like a tree?


It looks highly damaged and even if it wasn't, as soon as a structure leans out of its normal COG and surpasses the maximum load limit of its connections, it will snap and then the only thing it CAN do is fall straight down. Its not all "one piece" like a tree. The structure and its connections I'm guessing where designed for vertical loads.





Since it was already together after the building fell, the forces of the falling building couldn't effect it anymore, therefore something else caused it to collapse into itself. Can you explain what could have caused these huge columns to come apart after the buildings forces have past?


As I pointed out, the effects of the collapse was mostly over, but the damage was already done to it





No, I'm saying that these columns were huge and that part of the thermite reaction took a little longer than the rest.


What evidence of thermite is there?
Because this structure was the last to fall, it would be basically right at the top and not lost among the tangle of debris. Why did no one notice an ongoing thremite reaction?



Or can you give me another scenario of how these welds just mysteriously became detached


Yes. They failed because of the massive collapse of a huge structure exerting damage to them beyond what they were designed to do.
Do you think they suffered no structural damage? Just look at them.



Everyone who has seen the spire stand for a minute then mysteriously fall into itself instead of toppling like a tree.


Who are these people and is there any video? How long did it stand before failing?




Then I suggest you re-read Christophera's thread about the concrete core. Not that I'm advocating what he has to say but there are plenty of pictures of the spire and core structure from both towers.


Sorry but I find Christos theory to be ludicrous.



It should have toppled like a tree. That's the main point of this thread, that it should have toppled but instead fell into itself.


I don't think it was possible to fall over like a tree for the reasons I stated.



BTW, I'm surprised to hear you say that you haven't heard of the spire or core structure standing because I know for a fact you've been around long enough in these threads to see this.


Its not that I haven't heard of its existence or standing for a while, it that I never heard of that fact being evidence of anything.



but at the end, they show a video of the spire collapse.


Thanks Griff, I'll check out the video.



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 01:03 PM
link   
No evidence of thermite? There's remote evidence that supports the liklihood of assisting charges. The thermal temperature readings after the collapse (few days after), the flowing molten metal out of the side of the building and the remote isolated squibs out of the sides of the building.

It's understood that the remaining columns weren't just one piece, but a load of pieces connected together. However they had no huge vertical load being displaced upon them. Not to say it should of just stayed upright because the core and trusses helped hold it up, but it wouldn't of fell upon itself or else it would of already did that from the force coming down around it from the collapsing of the building, so it does reveal it still has structural integrity.



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vushta
It looks highly damaged and even if it wasn't, as soon as a structure leans out of its normal COG and surpasses the maximum load limit of its connections, it will snap and then the only thing it CAN do is fall straight down. Its not all "one piece" like a tree. The structure and its connections I'm guessing where designed for vertical loads.


Obviously you haven't done your physics homework. Once something has surpassed it's center of gravity it falls over, not straight down. Do this little test. Stand on one foot and lean over your center of gravity. Do you fall straight down or do you topple to the side? I think we all know what the answer is. Plus, since it is still intact, yes it is all one piece. The columns were welded together making it one piece.


As I pointed out, the effects of the collapse was mostly over, but the damage was already done to it


This damage that you state was done to it is correct but it was still one piece like a tree. It was intack....meaning it wasn't damaged enough to fail. So, what was this new energy that makes it fall again? Wind maybe but still would have toppled rather than fall straight down.


What evidence of thermite is there?
Because this structure was the last to fall, it would be basically right at the top and not lost among the tangle of debris. Why did no one notice an ongoing thremite reaction?


There is a photo of this ongoing reaction. The funny thing about the photo is that you can clearly see white smoke comming from the tips of the spire. What would cause this? Friction from the fall? Yup, that's it, the collapse caused enough friction that would make steel smoke.


Yes. They failed because of the massive collapse of a huge structure exerting damage to them beyond what they were designed to do.
Do you think they suffered no structural damage? Just look at them.


First, this massive collapse is already past. Second, since they stayed intack until AFTER the collapse, the structural damage was NOT enough to break them apart. Again, I'll ask, what was the extra force that ultimately made them fail? That's like saying "I threw a ball into a windshield and it fractured but after the ball rolled onto the ground the windshield just blew apart because of the already structural damage to it." Baseless arguement.


Who are these people and is there any video? How long did it stand before failing?


I've already posted a link to a video. If you want more...look it up yourself.


Sorry but I find Christos theory to be ludicrous.


Good for you. That wasn't my point if you had read what I posted. My point was that there are plenty of pictures of the spire in that thread...I even posted 2 for you from that thread.


I don't think it was possible to fall over like a tree for the reasons I stated.


And the reasons you stated are false.


Its not that I haven't heard of its existence or standing for a while, it that I never heard of that fact being evidence of anything.


It's evidence of something else being involved. The fact it didn't fall over like a person standing on one foot and going beyond their center of gravity but it fell straight down is evidence that before it began to fall something severed it to fall straight down. No I don't think they blew it up after the building fell but I do believe that the thermite (or whatever) just wasn't timed perfectly and it stood until the thermite did it's job.



Thanks Griff, I'll check out the video.


You're welcome.



posted on Jun, 28 2006 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff
It should have toppled like a tree. That's the main point of this thread, that it should have toppled but instead fell into itself.


Absolutely, and both towers should have fallen towards the damage of the impact zones, they did not. The tower hit worst, burned worst, fell last. against all reason.


Originally posted by Vushta
It looks highly damaged and even if it wasn't, as soon as a structure leans out of its normal COG and surpasses the maximum load limit of its connections, it will snap and then the only thing it CAN do is fall straight down. Its not all "one piece" like a tree. The structure and its connections I'm guessing where designed for vertical loads


You have described the beginning of the topple of a tower and then assert it stops doing that (check Newton) and falls straight down. Then guess if towers are designed for vertical loading.


Originally posted by VushtaI don't think it was possible to fall over like a tree for the reasons I stated.


I do not think those were stated well enough. Try again, use some evidence this time.


Originally posted by Vushta
What evidence of thermite is there?
Because this structure was the last to fall, it would be basically right at the top and not lost among the tangle of debris. Why did no one notice an ongoing thremite reaction?


There was thermite in the basement, but the evidence of it higher up is not so abundant and certain, Check this thread. fairly conclusive along withthe fact that many vehicles were burned that were a good distance from the towers,

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Originally posted by Griff
Or can you give me another scenario of how these welds just mysteriously became detached



Originally posted by VushtaYes. They failed because of the massive collapse of a huge structure exerting damage to them beyond what they were designed to do.
Do you think they suffered no structural damage? Just look at them.


Your choice of words indicates a desire to distort. The word massive shows this. The towers were massive, but they were very strong.

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. 4



Originally posted by Griff
Then I suggest you re-read Christophera's thread about the concrete core. Not that I'm advocating what he has to say but there are plenty of pictures of the spire and core structure from both towers.



Originally posted by VushtaSorry but I find Christos theory to be ludicrous.


I explain free fall and pulverization in a realistic and feasible fashion. Is this a situation where a poster with no evidence, professing only a belief that the evidence presented is no good, essentially rejecting and dismissing all evidence that threatens to create a reasonable explanation of events?

www.algoxy.com...


Originally posted by Griff
It should have toppled like a tree. That's the main point of this thread, that it should have toppled but instead fell into itself.


You are too kind to the officials Griff, excellent thread. Class "A" presentation. I can only define this event,



As a high speed series of detonations of high explosives that are optimally contained (max pressure, dust, breakage etc. ) high explosives that are also optimally distributed.


Originally posted by Griff
BTW, I'm surprised to hear you say that you haven't heard of the spire or core structure standing because I know for a fact you've been around long enough in these threads to see this.



Originally posted by VushtaIts not that I haven't heard of its existence or standing for a while, it that I never heard of that fact being evidence of anything.


You do support the steel core columns theory do you not? The spire has been presented as one of those.



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 06:08 PM
link   
Thanks to GrimReaper in another thread that he started, here is a video of the spire collapse. Notice that it stood for a few seconds after the building was down around it. What made it fall straight down and not topple?

Here's the video. video.google.com...



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 06:42 PM
link   
Here's another clip, a .gif animation taken from 9/11 Eyewitness:




posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 06:52 PM
link   
Thanks for that gif BSBray11. I'd like to hear your thoughts of why it didn't topple but disintigrate into itself. Notice how the columns sway, meaning that they were at least connected enough to withstand the forces of wind and gravity. Do you think the force of the bottom falling down be enough to dislodge the welds so that it didn't topple? Or do you think it should have toppled?

Also, I too would like to see video of tower 2's core standing.

p.s. I always thought the spire was the core but you've got me thinking when you said that might be a corner of the outside columns.



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 07:42 PM
link   
In that gif you can clearly see a huge peice of the structure hit the spire low and thats when the wavering starts. You can also see it "snap" right before it falls away.

[edit on 4-7-2006 by Vushta]



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 08:03 PM
link   
Griff, if you watch the actual footage from 9/11 Eyewitness (a lot of it is cut off in that .gif), you'll see large sections DID topple like trees. The video file for this is actually smaller than the above .gif. Ironic. x.x

Here's the link to a fuller video of the spire collapsing, WMV format, roughly 1MB.

Large sections topple off like falling timber, and then what's left sinks straight down. I don't think the downward collapse was natural. Conventional demolitions blow things from the base. They may have done the same here. Hard to say, though.


Originally posted by Griff
Also, I too would like to see video of tower 2's core standing.


Me too! I would looove to see a vid of that. I've seen two or three stills but that's it. The image Christophera's posted around is from one set of the stills, and another set shows this:



But back to WTC1's spire.. I think LaBTop suggested the WTC1 spire was actually a corner box column, and then it was either him or somebody else that posted a set of pictures from an angle I hadn't seen before, and you could see much further down the spire, and it did look like a corner section. I've looked for those pics again but haven't been able to find them.

I have a suspicion that if this was the core, we'd be seeing a lot more gray, too.


Use 7 WTC's corner for reference in this set:




posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 05:00 AM
link   
About that core etc. I've used first and the last photos of these four and put them together. It looks like these "core" it's in the middle of the building but it could also be front "outer wall/structure".





posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 10:42 AM
link   
Thanks bsbray and Stolarz for the help. It does look like the middle of the building but could also be the far outer corner because of the orientation of the building. Really, I don't think whether it was the corner or core makes much difference in what I'm trying to say. I'll look at the video you posted bsbray and see what you said about some of it toppling. If that is the case then it did what it was suppossed to do. I'd still like to see WTC2's core fall in video. Thanks again guys.

Vushta. I think you are talking about the same thing bsbray is. If that's the case then there is no arguement. I'm still waiting for the video to download.

[edit on 7/5/2006 by Griff]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join