Remember that 'concrete' core

[DoYouEverWonder]

that Christophera used to go on about?

I just found a much better copy of the picture of the structure that was exposed during the collapse that he kept posting.


?sdfg


I don't know about anyone else but I see steel, not concrete.


Now can someone explain to me what could make steel columns 'disintergrate'?

?sdfg

[LARED]

1. Mind telling why you think they disintegrated? (n/t)

[DoYouEverWonder]

2. There was a video

that Christophera used to post from the same angle and in the video they appear to disintergrate rather then topple over. It might be an illusion from the concrete dust pouring down the sides? However, you see even in the still images the big column to the right is just about gone by the next picture, while the other column is still standing.

[dailykoff]

3. Nice pics. I think the spooky spire

wasn't really part of the core, either. It looks more like a corner of the WTC1 perimeter wall. I'm pretty sure the core was long gone at that point, and they kind of let the perimeter walls take care of themselves.



?

[vincent_vega_lives]

7. Exactamundo (n/t)

[canetoad]

4. Definitely steel

But it did not disintegrate. You need to watch a movie clip of the spire falling, many times over.

What I think happened is the steel columns abruptly dropped straight down. What appears to be disintegration is the powdered concrete, other dust and debris sitting on the columns. It is left behind in the air for a few seconds when the column drops straight down, very quickly. You can see an animated gif here

Strangely, these remaining columns do not topple over, despite their apparent vulnerability. Neither do they crumble from the top, as you can see by the dark blob about halfway up the structure - on the thin part. You can see it fall with the steel intact above it for a certain amount of time.

I guess the big question is what made the 'spire' collapse so rapidly from the bottom?

[canetoad]

5. Bad me

Didn't realize I was linking directly to the gif. If the graphic has been pulled, find it here http://images.indymedia.org/imc/ontario/
search for dustspire.gif

[DoYouEverWonder]

6. The WTC was a steel building

and the steel columns in the core were massive. Especially compared to the much smaller trusses hanging off of them. Even the outer wall was mostly steel.

Look at the column that the two workers are looking up at, the massive steel column with the cross bars going across diagonally. These are the columns we are seeing in the images below. You can clearly see at least two of them. At this point, it looks like most of the other materials, wall board and aluminum have already been blow off.



By the time this fellow shot the next picture, the column in the back is gone and the other columns are getting thinner until they disappear.



The fires at the top of towers were not big enough, hot enough, for long enough to cause this. Where did the energy come from to cause a steel building to turn to dust? There had to be a source.

[vincent_vega_lives]

8. ?????

Are you saying Magneto had somthing to do with it?

[rman]

9. Obviously not -

DYEW poses a question about an occurence that is not explained by the Official Story.

[vincent_vega_lives]

10. The Problem is

The fires at the top of towers were not big enough, hot enough, for long enough to cause this. Where did the energy come from to cause a steel building to turn to dust? There had to be a source.

The basis for his question is an opinion stated as a fact, that is disputed by the vast majority of those who know better.

The second part of his question proposes a preposterous phenomena that again is his opinion stated as fact. So under those circumstances, I am not sure why it would need an explaination anywhere.

[rman]

11. So you believe that fire can turn a steel building into dust.

Interesting.

[vincent_vega_lives]

12. So you believe a steel building turned into dust.

Incredible.

[sabbat hunter]

13. the steel didnt turn to dust

the concrete floors did

[Ferry Fey]

15. How much does suspended dust/debris weigh, and affect things?

I've got a question about the suspended dust and debris. I don't have any formal physics study, so perhaps someone could clarify this for me in fairly simple language.

I've seen the figure of 100 million tons of rubble from the WTC tossed around. The figure comes up fairly often in a Google search, in all sorts of non-9/11 contexts where A Really, Really Big Number needs to be used, so we can take it with a pinch of salt as an accurate number. But use it for the sake of argument.

The debris cloud started pretty much immediately, with massive amounts of debris ejected in a thick opaque nimbus. We see steel beams flying in the air.

Is there a point where there's enough stuff suspended in the air that it shouldn't be stressing the structure below it sufficiently to continue the process of destruction at that rate? Or is something else in play that over-rides it? (uh, other than thermite...)

[DoYouEverWonder]

16. According to this press report

there was 1.46 million tons of debris. 600,000 tons of it was fine particle dust.




The 1.46 million tons of Trade Center debris dumped in the Staten Island landfill have been at the center of a dispute between the city and a family group, W.T.C. Families for Proper Burial, since 2002. The family members contend that remnants of their loved ones are intermingled with the 600,000 tons of fine particle dust there. The city insists the human remains were removed.

http://www.downtownexpress.com/de_146/cb1lashesoutatstate.html

[rman]

14. Much of the concrete in the floors obviously did

And a fair amount of the steel was melted.

[DoYouEverWonder]

17. Plus, there was hardly anything left

that was recognizable in the rubble. No desks, computers, equipment, not even a toilet seat.

[quickesst]

18. UH...

The fires at the top of towers were not big enough, hot enough, for long enough to cause this. Where did the energy come from to cause a steel building to turn to dust? There had to be a source.

"The basis for his question is an opinion stated as a fact, that is disputed by the vast majority of those who know better."

Could you post a link to that "vast majority" who know better? Besides yourself and a few others here. Let's read what the vast majority is postitive of. Thanks.
quickesst