Y ·
If you can't see the core of the building in your own picture there's nothing I can do for you.
Just ask yourself what would happen to the penthouse if you take out the CORE COLUMNS. You can find them by looking at the numbers forming a rectangle in the CENTER of the building.
Replies
Leo ·
On this point I think we're bickering over terminology. The "core columns" are as you say all the internal columns in the rectangle. But those core columns are - in multiple sources ive seen, split into 3 designations. East, west and central. According to that designation, the East penthouse that collapsed was over the east columns, not the central columns.
While I think that point is just a mixup of terminology, I do want to reiterate an important point I made earlier. You pointed me to 15:41 in one of your videos in which a "demolitions expert" said that the East Penthouse falling was indicative of a controlled demo because in controlled demos the center of the building tends to collapse first and the outside follows. An implosion.
But this is clearly wrong in this case. If this was a controlled demo you would expect the whole penthouse to collapse together roughly around the same time, or the center penthouse to collapse first. Instead, we saw just the east penthouse go several seconds before the rest of the roof structure (some claim a whole 8 seconds earlier.) This is not indicative of a controlled implosion. If this was a controlled demo, it was a botched, mistimed controlled demo.
Y ·
Glad you finally understand what the central columns are.
It amuses me that a demolition expert tells you that that this is exactly how he would do it, but you THINK you know better.
There's a very clear pattern: people who know nothing about 9/11 tend to believe the official narrative. People who know a lot about it know it's bs. The more you learn about it, the less you believe the government.
Nobody has ever started out believing alternative narratives and then read the commission report and started to come around. It doesn’t happen.
This is always a good indicator of which side is lying.
At this point, the only people who still believe the official story either know next to nothing about that day, or they have a strong psychological urge to defend the government because the government ("daddy") being evil would break their mind.
Leo ·
Lol. I can never tell if you're trolling
Leo ·
Which columns was the demolitions expert taking about? The eastern columns? The central columns not under the east penthouse, or all the core collumns?
Y ·
When people talk about the core columns they usually mean all the columns in the center of the building, as opposed to those in the outside walls. That would include those under the penthouse.
Leo ·
Cool. So the demo expert is saying: all the core columns must have been cut - thats why you see the east penthouse falling right? What about the center and west penthouse on the rest of the roof? Why did those stand for 8 whole seconds after all the core columns were cut?
Y ·
Why not?
Leo ·
Well why did the east penthouse fall and they didnt?
Leo ·
You dont need to be an engineer to reason through this part. Dont give up. We know at least some of the columns gave way when we see the east penthouse collapse right? You and the "expert" are saying that must be when the rest of the columns were cut as well right? Then why can the external structure, including the roof continue standing for 8 seconds?
Y ·
Why not? Do you understand that cutting the columns still leaves concrete and steel everywhere?
The core was weakened, some of it collapsed. Then you take out the rest.
The hilarious part is that once you take controlled demolition into consideration there is no mystery whatsoever.
The mystery is when you refuse to take it into consideration.
You should go watch some controlled demolitions. See how explosions run through in different phases.
Leo ·
Bingo. So you're saying that the external structure can support itself, to some extent, without the core right?
Y ·
Looks like it.
Leo ·
Then how do you know the rate at which the core columns failed? Why couldn't they fail progressively over 8 seconds?
Y ·
They could. But not without being taken out on purpose.
Leo ·
Why do you say that?
Y ·
Because we never see buildings have all their columns fail, except for controlled demolition - and on 9/11
They are built to not have that happen. That's the entire point of a building.
Leo ·
Right, so just speculation based on "its never happened before and we hope the engineers built it well." Any other reasons?
Y ·
No other reasons necessary.
If it never happens but then happens three times in a row in the same event you got yourself a gigantic red flag.
Leo ·
Not true, the towers collapsed very differently than wtc7. But disregard that. Was there anything about the uniformity with which wtc7 fell? Something about free fall speed? Where did that argument go?
Y ·
All three came down as if there was no resistance. This is only possible if there is no resistance. There can only be no resistance if it is taken out. By cuts and/or explosives.
Q.E.D
You are on your own now friend. I gave you way more time than you deserve.
Leo ·
The towers fell top down. You could clearly see the resistance they were encountering.
Wtc7 came down without resistance. But you've already acknowledged that resistance could have been removed over the course of 8 seconds. Which means all the arguments the "experts" and yourself used that the near free fall nature of the collapse indicates the core columns must have been cut nearly simultaneously - all of that is nonsense then?
So you're back to completely baseless speculation about the infallibility of building design 🙄
Y ·
Lmao the towers literally fell through the path of the most resistance.
Had the top collapsed and then fell off to a side, you could say wow, we built thise towers to withstand plane impact, but sometimes strange things happen!
But going all the way down through the path of the greatest resistance is a ludacris notion.
Even you must admit that. Otherwise, what's the point in talking? Maybe study some physics.
Leo ·
Further, you've disqualified another class of argument used by your experts with your own reasoning. That if this wasnt simultaneous demolition, it would have fallen over to the side.
Apparently not, seeing as how the whole east internal core gave way first and nothing happened.
Y ·
Alright.
Leo ·
Want me to show you the math how a weight with momentum has more force than standing still, and how that leads to progressive collapse?
Y ·
Show me the math of something, anything, falling through the path of most resistance when all the other paths are open.
If you can't do that, we are done.
Leo ·
Tomorrow we will do some math
Y ·
There is no we here.
Leo ·
Ok ill do math 😅 and you can cheer me on and talk about daddies or whatever it is you keep talking about 😋
Casey ·
👀
