47 vertical support columns in core of each Twin Tower from bedrock to top floor

[Fizz]

Please Chris. I have to laugh some more. Please make yourself look like more of an asshole than you already do and explain HOW they would use that as a reference piece...

i'm not sure we should encourage him. if he becomes more of an asshole i am worried about him developing his own gravitational field and collapsing in upon himself to create a balck hole which would eventually suck us all into his ass.

not a pretty picture. i doubt he showers much.

 

[Christophera]

Those aren't buttplates Chris.

I've circled in the above photo what they are.

The furthest is a butt plate. Just as these are.

Butt plates were not used reguarly, in fact they would be avoided as they are more expensive and not as strong as welds. However they are needed to realign guide rail support steel that is out of plumb or position.

 

[Gamolon]

Those aren't buttplates Chris.

I've circled in the above photo what they are.

The furthest is a butt plate. Just as these are.

Butt plates were not used reguarly, in fact they would be avoided as they are more expensive and not as strong as welds. However they are needed to realign guide rail support steel that is out of plumb or position.

They are? How in the world did they BOLT those plates together with the matching column on top through holes when the "plates" in those photos are aligned VERTICALLY, on the SIDES of the columns?

Also, show me proof that, in addition to the "buttplates" being bolted, they didn't also WELD the columns together.

 

[Fizz]

They are? How in the world did they BOLT those plates together with the matching column on top through holes when the "plates" in those photos are aligned VERTICALLY, on the SIDES of the columns?

Also, show me proof that, in addition to the "buttplates" being bolted, they didn't also WELD the columns together.

they are clearly shown in your photo to not be "butt plates".

chris needs to show where he gets his evidence that they are butt plates. he needs to show evidence of a concrete core. he needs to show construction photos and plans that show a concrete core.

HE'S GOT NOTHING.

 

[Christophera]

Those aren't buttplates Chris.

I've circled in the above photo what they are.

The furthest is a butt plate. Just as these are.

Butt plates were not used reguarly, in fact they would be avoided as they are more expensive and not as strong as welds. However they are needed to realign guide rail support steel that is out of plumb or position.

They are? How in the world did they BOLT those plates together with the matching column on top through holes when the "plates" in those photos are aligned VERTICALLY, on the SIDES of the columns?

The plates on top of the sidewalk photo are obviously a larger horizontal dimension than the section of the vertical steel below it. You would be the first one to atempt to say it was not.

Also, show me proof that, in addition to the "buttplates" being bolted, they didn't also WELD the columns together.

Clearly you need to read more often, that is exactly what I've said. Or perhaps your using "confuser" statements manipulatively on behalf of the perpetrators interests as does fizzit.

Welds are cheaper, faster and stronger but once it is joined there is very little adjustment. When that goes past a certain tolerence a butt plates is needed to shift to the postion or tilt to plumb.

 

[Gamolon]

Also, show me proof that, in addition to the "buttplates" being bolted, they didn't also WELD the columns together.

Clearly you need to read more often, that is exactly what I've said.

Really? Exactly what you said? You have said all along that the buttplate connections were welded? Then please explain this next quote from you?

Butt plates were not used reguarly, in fact they would be avoided as they are more expensive and not as strong as welds.

Look at the bolded, enlarged text. See where you say the buttplate connections weren't as strong as welds? If they weren't as strong as welds, then what were they? Bolted?

Here's a quote from your site:

...butt plates are a valuable joining method. However, such joints are not strong enough for "core columns".
Core columns must be butt welded with 100% welds deep filet welds as were the interior box columns which surround the core of the twins. This diagram shows a typical fillet weld detail on an "I" beam.

What type of connections were the "buttplates" Chris if not welded?

Let's see a quick diagram of how you think the "elevator guide rail support steel" columns were connected at the "buttplates". Let's put your VAST construction and design knowledge to the test. So far you've balked and any detailed challange to explain yourself.

 

[Gamolon]

More about yourbuttplate connection bullshit. Below is another quout from you:

Hmmmmm, we've seen fizzrodd and divot talk about steel core columns, but they've never shown them. I know what was really there was elevator guide rail support steel (see butt plate connections left and right of the central crane) barely fastened together...

Please explain what you meant by "barely fastened together".

 

[Gamolon]

Another quote from you Chris:

The bigger fact is that you cannot show I ever said they were not welded. I've said that sometimes butt plates are used instead of a weld so the elevator guide rail support can be shifted.

Instead of a weld? What type of connection are you refering to other than a weld?

 

[Gamolon]

And here you have it folks!!! Chris caught lying once again. Chris has always implied that the supposed buttplate connections were bolted together. Now, being shown we was sadly mistaken, he tries to lie his way out of yet another mistake by saying he never said the columns WEREN'T welded together.

Well here is a quote of his:

Because the butt plates were welded to their indivdual sections does nothing to reduce the meaning of the fact that the butt plates facilitated bolting the sections together forming a weak joint.

So the plates were welded to the INDIVIDUAL columns section themselves, but the joints between THE COLUMNS were bolted, forming a weak joint.

BOLTED TOGETHER.

What a freaking moron. You've told so many lies that you can't keep them straight anymore.

 

[sboyle24]

This Thread says

 

[Gamolon]

Chris, is this what you think existed as butt plates???

 

[Gamolon]

Chris, is this what you think existed as butt plates???

I guess that is what you meant given your quote here:

The vertical steel in the core area has a small plate welded to the top of it. It can be termed a "butt plate" and mates with another having identical bolt holes where the 2 are joined together. Totally inadequate for creating a core column as it has no ability to resist lateral loads.

Another question Chris. Can you explain this quote:

Because the support steel was kept straight by being bolted to the inner concrete core walls,...

Really?

Can you show me the where the "bolted connections to the inner concrete core walls" occur in this picture:

Bolted to the walls?!

 

[Christophera]

Chris, is this what you think existed as butt plates???

I guess that is what you meant given your quote here:

The vertical steel in the core area has a small plate welded to the top of it. It can be termed a "butt plate" and mates with another having identical bolt holes where the 2 are joined together. Totally inadequate for creating a core column as it has no ability to resist lateral loads.

Another question Chris. Can you explain this quote:

Because the support steel was kept straight by being bolted to the inner concrete core walls,...

Really?

Can you show me the where the "bolted connections to the inner concrete core walls" occur in this picture:

Bolted to the walls?!

Gumjob doesn't know the difference between a base plate and a butt plate!

OMG!

The perpetrators of mass murder would prefer that you obscure the fact that you cannot source ONE image from 9-11 that shows steel core columns int he core area.

I can show only an empty core with images showing concrete or the remants of it.

 

[Gamolon]

Chris, is this what you think existed as butt plates???

I guess that is what you meant given your quote here:


Another question Chris. Can you explain this quote:

Because the support steel was kept straight by being bolted to the inner concrete core walls,...

Really?

Can you show me the where the "bolted connections to the inner concrete core walls" occur in this picture:

Bolted to the walls?!

Gumjob doesn't know the difference between a base plate and a butt plate!

OMG!

The perpetrators of mass murder would prefer that you obscure the fact that you cannot source ONE image from 9-11 that shows steel core columns int he core area.

I can show only an empty core with images showing concrete or the remants of it.

Sorry joker, that image shows exactly what you are implying existed. A plate on the end of a column that is bolted to one exactly the same on the other.

You have been caught lying once again.

 

[Christophera]

Chris, is this what you think existed as butt plates???

I guess that is what you meant given your quote here:


Another question Chris. Can you explain this quote:


Really?

Can you show me the where the "bolted connections to the inner concrete core walls" occur in this picture:

Bolted to the walls?!

Gumjob doesn't know the difference between a base plate and a butt plate!

OMG!

The perpetrators of mass murder would prefer that you obscure the fact that you cannot source ONE image from 9-11 that shows steel core columns int he core area.

I can show only an empty core with images showing concrete or the remants of it.

Sorry joker, that image shows exactly what you are implying existed. A plate on the end of a column that is bolted to one exactly the same on the other.

You have been caught lying once again.

B, b, wa, haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahaaaaaa, you have been shown lying.


A "butt plate" is very thick because it has to have resistence against flex. Your "base plate" shows almost no thickness. It is for keeping the base of a column fastened to the floor and foundation from "kicking out".

Below they are very thick.

In your image they are very thick. The furthest one.

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff290/gamolon/nobuttplates.jpg

As usual, the opposite of what the agent says is true.

Your other pic won't show the fastener locations if they existed as low as the base wall. The core itself up 4 floors was bolted at each interior box column.

 

[Fizz]

Your other pic won't show the fastener locations if they existed as low as the base wall. The core itself up 4 floors was bolted at each interior box column.

of course you have building plans and pictures of your concrete core during construction to back up your claims...... right?

 

[Gamolon]

Gumjob doesn't know the difference between a base plate and a butt plate!

OMG!

The perpetrators of mass murder would prefer that you obscure the fact that you cannot source ONE image from 9-11 that shows steel core columns int he core area.

I can show only an empty core with images showing concrete or the remants of it.

Sorry joker, that image shows exactly what you are implying existed. A plate on the end of a column that is bolted to one exactly the same on the other.

You have been caught lying once again.

B, b, wa, haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahaaaaaa, you have been shown lying.


A "butt plate" is very thick because it has to have resistence against flex. Your "base plate" shows almost no thickness. It is for keeping the base of a column fastened to the floor and foundation from "kicking out".

Below they are very thick.

In your image they are very thick. The furthest one.

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff290/gamolon/nobuttplates.jpg

As usual, the opposite of what the agent says is true.

Your other pic won't show the fastener locations if they existed as low as the base wall. The core itself up 4 floors was bolted at each interior box column.

It doesn't matter in the least. My drawing I presented was a graphic representation of what you THINK existed and had no scale whatsoever. You're just trying to get out of the fact that you LIE at every turn when you get caught presenting some bogus information.

You claim the "elevator guide rail steel" (which are actually core columns) could NOT have been core columns because they were to weak based on the supposed BOLTED butt plate connections. Then you were presented with closeup photos of those supposed "butt plate" connections that show they are in fact lug type pieces welded to the side of the columns.

Then you are asked to present proof that those connections were only BOLTED (as you claimed) and then you turn around and say that they were welded also.

You have been proven to be a liar who can't keep all his lies straight. You been lying so much over the years, it's easy to go back and see how you've changed your story according to the mistakes people find in your bullshit.

You have been asked for proof as to why you've made these claims/changes and you can come up with none.

So here's a simple question. Why did you lie and first say the "butt plate" connections were bolted and then turn around and say they were welded? I mean your reasoning as to why they are "guide rails" and not core columns is based solely on your claim that they had bolted connections and those connections are weak compared to welded connections.

Now you ADMIT that they were welded in addition to being bolted, which totally debunks your "weak connection" argument. Not to mention the fact that those are NOT "butt plates" as has been proven.

 

[Gamolon]

CLEARLY not "thick butt plates", but some type of "lug". Look at the top red circle. These are welded to the SIDE of the column. I see two of them on the left side.

It's obvious you're making shit up as usual.

 

[creativedreams]

High school level Physics calculations show Gravity on the World Trade Center Towers was 0.1 KiloTons of TNT-equivalent energy in "action".

The debris and dust erupted over 8.5 KiloTons of 'TNT' energy in "reaction".

FACT: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction
0.1 KT ACTION does not equal 8.5 KT REACTION
http://Newton's_laws_of_motion

When the top chunk of Mt. St. Helens turned into a cloud of dust, thrown on the landscape, the TV and newspapers said the mountain expended the energy equivalent of 30,000 K Tons of TNT.

How did they know that number?
Were there conflicting opinions?
Was it a debateable issue whether it was 40,000 KT or 10,000 KT of TNT equivalent energy?

No, it was 30,000 KT, no argument, no debate....the number is not an opinion, it's a calculation of a fact.

Like an Example problem in Physics homework, multiply the massive weight of the rock times how far it flew against gravity's energy forcing it down to the ground. Weight x distance x gravity, is the energy number......the math is done......easy as pie.

The same calculation makes a fact that 8.5 KT of energy force expanded the dust cloud of pulverized concrete which came out of each Twin Tower on 9/11 and spread across Manhattan's buildings and streets an inch thick, or more.

8.5 KT of expended energy, is the number which American Corporate Media does NOT say, because it's censored, prohibited, since there's a mystery about where that energy came from. Since 0.1 KT, is all the energy that gravity had, forcing down on each building.

Gravity smacking the floors together, one-by-one flattening them like pancakes....or 110 floors pushed down into a stack on ground level, where gravity can't push any farther.

Multiply all the weight that came down the distance to the ground, and the fact is 0.1 KT of TNT equivalent energy was expended. That's all there possibly was. If a Tower weighed twice as much, there was 0.2 KT of energy in it. If it weighed twice as much being twice as tall, then 0.4 KT of energy was in it at all times.

Whether the building is on fire or not, it weighs the same and stands as tall, until gravity, not fire, starts into action.

Same as if you have a book on the table, and you push it off the edge so it drops on a weight scale. When it hits the scale, it scores the same (energy) force of gravity pushing its fall, every time, whether or not the book is on fire. Instead of a book, if you use a balloon full of water, the force measured when it falls down on the scale is the same, every time, whether the water is liquid or solid ice. And, if you know how tall the table is, and you know the weight of the book or water balloon, you can calculate the pounds of force the scale is going to show under the falling object and have that answer before you push the weight off the table.

It's not an "opinion," it's a calculation, it's a fact.

Each Twin Tower dust cloud measured 8.5 KT of (energy) force spreading out of the building. But only 0.1 KT of gravity pushed each building, straight down. This Action is NOT equal Reaction and was as if you dropped a 1 Ton book off the table and the scale measured 85 Tons hit it.

The mystery of where the extra energy force came from, measured on 9/11, is an unsolved mystery.

American Corporate News has the factual calculation of the explosive equivalent energy number, the same place they got it for Mt. St. Helens.....so what is the difference with our Media Today?

 

[Fizz]

is there any reason you posted this here AND started a new thread with the same post or are you just a fucking moron?