| Welcome! You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! |
| Apology To Dylan Avery & Loose Change; Truth and "Face to Face" sharing | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: May 15 2008, 02:49 PM (2,806 Views) | |
| JFK | Jun 26 2008, 09:40 PM Post #201 |
|
Nope, that one is new to me. |
 |
 
|
| stannrodd | Jun 26 2008, 09:55 PM Post #202 |
|
JFK, Christopher shouldn't demand from us ... perhaps he should visit a library and look through a few books. The old fashioned way ... with books from the era .. you know the ones which were written by the planners of 9/11 ..  ... just so Chris could claim there was a concrete core and everything else is a lie or faked or misinfo/disinfo. Stann |
|
|
|
| JFK | Jun 26 2008, 10:29 PM Post #203 |
|
Yes that is true Stann, and you would think that the university libraries near christophers residence would be a valuable asset.... if he truly wanted to do honest research. |
|
|
|
| seatnineb | Jul 1 2008, 05:55 AM Post #204 |
|
Nice fotos Stann The naudet footage also features drywall on the wall of the core...after the marbal has been knocked off You can see it just as Chief Pfeiffer enters the revolving door in the lobby... 
|
|
|
|
| IVXX | Jul 1 2008, 09:08 AM Post #205 |
MDCCLXXVI
|
WOW!!! I have been gone long. The concrete core myth is getting airtime again here?? I in no way, shape or form support the concrete core but let's not use Leslie Robertson's words as proof of anything. This man will tell you they planned for plane impact but never took fuel into account. |
|
|
|
| Avenger | Jul 1 2008, 08:06 PM Post #206 |
|
Don't need Leslie Robertson's words. Pictures alone work just fine. You can see the perimeter columns and core columns supporting the trusses. Load bearing. |
|
|
|
| stannrodd | Jul 2 2008, 12:57 AM Post #207 |
|
The reason for not considering the fuel aspect separately was probably due to the obvious fact that there would be fuel and a subsequent fire. Fuel (jetX) source would be limited to that in the plane and the inherent safeguards in fire protection ... such as the flammability aspect of office furnishings etc. If you research the United States Lines ocean liner the SS United States, you will find that flammability was a real architectural process. There was no wood. Even the pianos for the entertainment areas were not to be made of wood. Fire protection before sprinklers was based on using the least flammable construction and occupational flammability standards. These were incorporated into the WTC towers. The fires which ensued were fueled by very limited flammability objects. The building structure would not have suffered a fatal blow by a fire and the structural redundancy was over engineered to ensure there was sufficiency in the event of a Boeing 707 aircraft impacting the structure wherever. Stann |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · World Trade Center · Next Topic » |
11:33 AM Dec 6
