January 7th in September 11 Attacks Research and Analysis by .

The Design and Construction of the WTC

  HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL TRUTHERS!!! Any serious study of the Twin Tower collapse needs to carefully examine the structure and foundations of the buildings.  I’m gob-smacked that the 9/11 Truth Movement hasn’t yet established an official agreed document about how the towers were made – before selling each …

 

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL TRUTHERS!!!

Any serious study of the Twin Tower collapse needs to carefully examine the structure and foundations of the buildings.  I’m gob-smacked that the 9/11 Truth Movement hasn’t yet established an official agreed document about how the towers were made – before selling each of their unique ‘truther’ theories on the 9/11 crime.   This needs to be done urgently now!

Current contention:  Did the Twin Towers have a concrete core or not?  Was the steel that was impacted by the alleged planes made more fire-proof with concrete reinforcement?

Did the Twin Towers have a concrete core or not? 

Those who answer “NO”:

Article by HowardRoark
posted on May, 16 2006 @ 12:41 PM

“The WTC Had a Concrete Core Hoax”

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread208023/pg2


Does the following article statement suggest it was not a concrete core?:

“The structural system, deriving from the I.B.M. Building in Seattle, is impressively simple. The 208-foot wide facade is, in effect, a prefabricated steel lattice, with columns on 39-inch centers acting as wind bracing to resist all overturning forces; the central core takes only the gravity loads of the building. A very light, economical structure results by keeping the wind bracing in the most efficient place, the outside surface of the building, thus not transferring the forces through the floor membrane to the core, as in most curtain-wall structures. Office spaces will have no interior columns. In the upper floors there is as much as 40,000 square feet of office space per floor. The floor construction is of prefabricated trussed steel, only 33 inches in depth, that spans the full 60 feet to the core, and also acts as a diaphragm to stiffen the outside wall against lateral buckling forces from wind-load pressures.  ” – – Source:
http://www.nyc-architecture.com/GON/GON001A.htm

 

“There is no concrete associated with any of the vertical structural components of the Twin Towers.  The only concrete in the buildings is a 4″ layer on the floor pans.  If you think otherwise, prove it.  It’s just not so. The twin towers had only steel in the columns and the only concrete was in the floors covering steel floor pans.  Concrete did not play a structural role in the building.”
–David Chandler


[David’s work has been primarily video measurement and analysis of the physics, to come to an understanding of the true nature of the building collapses on 9/11 (see video collection here<http://911speakout.org/?page_id=8>).]

Those who answer “YES”:

The BBC says “YES” the Towers had a concrete core – with this image allegedly published by them:

See also: http://concretecore.741.com/

Was the steel that was impacted by the alleged planes made more fire-proof with concrete reinforcement?

“The buildings are also thought to have been the first buildings to use non-asbestos fireproofing. The fibbers of the spray-on fireproofing product were reportedly ceramic rather than asbestos. At the heart of the structure was a vertical steel and concrete core, housing lift shafts and stairwells. Steel beams radiate outwards and connect with steel uprights, forming the building’s outer wall. All the steel was covered in concrete to guarantee firefighters a minimum period of one or two hours in which they could operate.”

Source:

http://www.blythe.org/nytransfer-subs/2001-Environment/Gallon_Environ.Letter:_Engineers_on_WTC_Collapse

 

 

“There was fire protection in the concrete reinforced steel of the Twin Towers – this fire protection is lost after 10 hours of burning. Without concrete fire proofing the steel would normally weaken after just 13 minutes. NIST says the fire proofing was dislodged by the impact of the planes which led to the dramatic collapse of the towers.” – Source:

Documentary film: “Twin Towers: The Missing Evidence”   Channel 5’s “The Missing Evidence” investigative series (aired on UK T.V. on Monday 3rd November 2014 at 8pm)

Channel 5’s “The Missing Evidence<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZ_A3j7gqeE>” investigative series (aired on UK T.V. on Monday 3rd November 2014 at 8pm) probes what may have caused the Twin Towers of New York’s World Trade Center to collapse after the 9/11 attacks in 2001, bearing in mind the huge fireproofing, steel-structured buildings were designed to withstand the impact of a commercial airliner. The filmmakers meet retired chemist Dr. Frank Greening, who spots a glaring omission in the tragedy’s official government report – which took four years to produce. In Norway, metallurgist Christian Simensen is also unconvinced by the report. What is the missing piece of the puzzle?

The Truth Movement needs to reach a consensus on this MAJOR issue of contention (- the design and construction of the Twin Towers at the WTC) ASAP!!

 

 

Dr. Jim Fetzer states:

I called out Steven Jones years and years ago for advancing an inadequate model of scientific method; and this, alas, although a special case, does not look like much of an improvement. How could anyone (at this late point in time) continue to insist that the Twin Towers had a concrete cores? And concrete is flimsy material compared with steel. This is reminiscent of those who want to insist that aluminum airplanes could have penetrated massive steel columns backed by an acre of concrete on a steel truss at each floor (where the purported Flight 11 is encountering severn of these and the purported Flight 175 eight)! I think we have reached the point of absurdity.” – Dr. Jim Fetzer

 

 

Gordon Duff of “Veterans Today” states:

“Consider mentioning that the plans for the towers have been in the public domain since 1962.

https://www1.nyc.gov/nyc-resources/service/1282/building-floor-plan

Any of the ‘troofer’ idiots could, at any time, view at no cost, photographing with their nasty little phones as they go along.

Then again, much of the construction was filmed in documentaries.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vgB8pckjUQ

The key was the powerful exoskeleton

most powerful of any building ever constructed before or since” – g

In response to the above comment emailed to various Truthers by Gordon Duff, I replied to all as follows:

My Email of Sat, Sep 15, 2018:

Gordon et al,

If information on how the Towers were made is readily available to the public – as stated in your email, then why is there ongoing on-line debates about the alleged hoax of there being a concrete core structure in the buildings? Why does a prominent truther like David Chandler still question the use of concrete to make the steel fireproof, when films such as the Channel 5 UK programme “Twin Towers – the missing evidence” clearly states that the official story is that the impact of the planes dislodged the concrete-reinforcement fireproofing from the steel, and thus weakened the steel structure to result in a freefall buildings collapse?


Truthers need to get back to the drawing board and study how the buildings were made, then reach a consensus on it so everyone knows what “concrete-reinforced steel” is – in relation to the make-up of the Twin Towers and the reasons for their collapse.

There’s no point in coming up with many widely different theories until there is a consensus about how the buildings were constructed at the time.

We should thank David Chandler for bringing this matter to our attention. Who would have thought that after 17 years truthers were still debating how the buildings were made.

Here are the flow chart stages of what needs to be done for any serious scientific investigation:

1. Reach a consensus on how the buildings were made at the time of their collapse, then document it as the official truther agreed scientific foundation for further investigation to be done.

2. Study the availability of evidence on the steel, especially the work of Steve De’ak to determine if missiles were used.

3. Consider what caused the freefall collapse in light of the outcome of the scientific study in above 2 stages.

4. Compile an official truther consensus report as the scientific method requires for any further study needed.


Truthers cannot skip any of the above stages as they must be done in the right order, otherwise they’d be putting the cart before the horse and their theories will not be built on solid foundations.

All those who wish to cooperate and stop the truther infighting should reply to this email so our teamwork may begin with all interested parties.



This is a call for unity and reason. Reply ASAP!

 

A wise person once told the following story:

“There was once a group of people who built their homes on rocks, and another group that built their homes on sand.  Of course, those who built their homes on firm foundations i.e. on rocks, were on safe grounds.  However, those who built their homes on sand were the losers.  Some time in the future, a group of “truthers” will build their Truther Empire for 9/11 truth, only to realize (after 17 years and counting!) that they didn’t even bother to properly study the foundations of the WTC – like how the Twin Towers were made, before they came up with all their wild and wonderful 9/11 ‘truth’ theories. Now THEY are the losers!”

One Comment

Leave a Reply





yankee451.info The Truth Hurts