67,000 people believe something's wrong with what we were told about 9/11

oh yea, question nothing, I'm sure the Government has YOUR best interests at heart and would NEVER do anything that was not in the best interests of the voters & taxpayers. .... right, & I'm the Easter Bunny!

The "smartest engineers" is a judgement call and in my opinion
it really doesn't matter how many PHD's have signed off on it, the
fact is that the NIST "report(s)" on the collapse events of WTC 1,2 & 7 are nothing more than white-wash jobs, a total coverup of what really happened. and published at taxpayer expense!

Your tax dollars at work, bogus reports......

 

Thank you for your opinion.

 

I never said what they were. You are saying floors fell on each other and brought the building down. So show us the pictures of these floors.

psik

 

There is a video from the Port Authority showing the concrete being poured on the floor pans with the rebar mesh lying on top. And the NIST includes the weight of the rebar with the floor pans and the trusses and the concrete in computing the total weight of the floor assembly.

You do not know what the hell you are talking about.

You just make crap up and spew it out.

psik

 

I'm not saying floors fell upon floors only. I'm saying debris from the upper section fell upon the floors below and sheared them apart. Steel columns, concrete, steel from the hat truss, elevator motors, elevator electrical panels, etc. Any amount of those components are going to create a load that the lower floors cannot handle. If the floors were designed to hold their weight and loads placed upon them , how can you think they were going to handle the HUGE load created by the falling upper section?

And according to this quote of yours:

Are you suggesting none of the flooring (trusses, steel mesh, concrete, or floor pans) was ever found?

 

What evidence can you show that indicates any of the concrete from the decks survived in solid form?

 

here ya go, from a truther website

 

The pix is of an obviously destroyed bit that had a mix of materials all pressed together and fused by heat. Maybe I should endeavor to be a bit more clear about this, how about a pix of a section of concrete deck that even if its a small chunk, is indicative of the original configuration of the slab, not some blob of materials that have been pressed together to form a "meteorite" .....

 

There bob goes again,moving the goalposts.

 

How much material is represented in the meteorite?
how much concrete from the floors of the towers can be accounted for
( other than the pulverized material that was scattered all over lower Manhattan? )?

Does showing a meteorite, constitute evidence of concrete deck material as a remnant of the tower "collapse"?

 

You tell me..

 

You didn't answer the quesiton genericBob.

Do you think it was just concrete that was pulverized or do you also think the metal floor pans, floor trusses, and steel mesh in the concrete was also pulverized?

 

So you're saying that none of the flooring was found.

Do you agree with genericBob and others that the concrete of the floors was pulverized into dust?

 

I would say that it is an entirely accurate statement that the vast majority of the concrete contained in the decks of the towers was pulverized and scattered all over lower Manhattan. In the absence of documentary pix of any parts of decks in solid form, its apparent that the ejected material contained the pulverized mass of the decks. The massive pulverization is an indicator of a huge use of energy and indeed focus of that energy, because if it were only the potential energy of the mass of the skyscraper turned into kinetic energy by its motion, it still lacks focus to make certain to pulverize all of the concrete, it takes focus to achieve this and a gravity driven collapse doesn't have focus.

 

You STILL have not answered my question above.

Do you think only the concrete was pulverized to dust or were the metal floor pans, floor trusses, and steel mesh in the concrete floors also pulverized?

 

Several photographs of chunks of concrete and whole slabs lying in the rubble.

http://911encyclopedia.com/wiki/index.php/World_Trade_Center_Concrete

I'm ready to watch the goalposts move, again.

 

Quote from your link .....
"Most of the concrete from the WTC site was pulverized into dust in the Sept. 11 attacks"

Thank U very much.

 

"Most", not "all". You do see the slabs you asked for, right?

 

The pix that has lighted candles in the frame and also a chunk of concrete that could not have been part of a floor because it was greater than 4" thick and did not have any evidence of steel mesh or rebar with it.
the other pix are of mass quantities of rubble and yes, some of it may have been bits of the decks, however, there is no pix where the focus of the pix is a piece of deck, or for that matter anything visible in the pictures that you linked to that indicates there is a chunk of deck present.

 

Look at the last photograph on that page and try again.

 

what is to define this as a deck and not a wall?
without a closer examination of the "slab" its really not properly defined.

 

there were concrete walls in the above ground portion of the towers?

 

Uh-huh, moving the goalposts.

Tell me, bob: where in the towers were there concrete walls?

- - - Updated - - -

Only where someone had painted himself into a corner.

 

Given the picture as the only "proof"
it can not be known for certain exactly what that is,
and indeed if it were a deck, is that the only remnant
of a deck that is to be seen? all of the other decks were
broken up/ pulverized & scattered all over lower Manhattan?
or?

 

You said there were NO pictures of unbroken concrete. Shown to be in error, you have moved the goalposts.
Why can you not simply admit you were wrong?