1. Joe Hill

    Joe Hill Member

    Richard Gage's AE911Truth organization asserts the North Tower antenna dropped straight down into the building at the beginning of collapse, and claims that is evidence the core columns had to be cut with cutter charges. The claim is made in the video, "9/11 Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out", at 53:20 here:

    As recently as March, 2018, one of the key AE911Truth engineers repeated the claim as fact:
    Having found no rebuttal of Szamboti's premise, it seems appropriate, for the record, to submit a thread on the topic. The assertion is patently false, easily discernible by studying collapse initiation from east or west. I used a video taken from the west, on the Hudson river:

    It's clear the tower top section and antenna are tilting south as one unit to begin collapse. The motion indicates that the core initially served as the fulcrum for the rotating motion of the tower top, buckled, and was quickly ripped apart.
    A closer look shows clearly the antenna did not drop into the building:

    Gage and Szamboti use only a view from the north, the optics of which are illustrated here:

    Editorial comment:
    It is unfathomable that professional architect and engineer researchers would fail to study initiation of collapse from all angles. Initiation, or onset, is actually all that matters in determining why a structure collapsed. It is clear onset of the North Tower was due to failure of the south wall, not the core. The south wall gradually formed an inward sink, long before onset of collapse, seen below, and there is no sign of core failure until after the tower top started tilting south. For Gage and Szamboti to still claim the core failed first reveals utter sloppiness, or outright bias/deceit, neither worthy of the "Truth" moniker.
    Last edited: Jul 15, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
  2. econ41

    econ41 Active Member

    Agreed that there may not be any rebuttal on this forum of Szamboti's specific claim about antenna drop >> caused by core column cutting. Your comments about geometry and viewpoint are probably sufficient of themselves to cast doubt on Szamboti's claim. However I suggest that comprehensive rebuttal is best framed in the context of the "tower top section and antenna are tilting south as one unit to begin collapse". i.e. the full context of the role played by the "Top Block" in the initiation stage...not just the antenna itself.

    I'll put some comments in line:
    << Fully agreed and probably strong enough as a stand alone argument.

    Agreed both points.

    This is the aspect that IMO needs discussion. The observed fact that the Top Blocks... both of them ... tilted as integral single units conflicts with the asserted no failure of core. We need to be very clear what stage we are discussing. My contention being that the Top Block maintained most of its structural integrity as it tilted - therefore the tilting resulted from differential shortening of columns whether perimeter or core. The integrity of the Top Blocks was destroyed after they started to fall bodily - the Top Block and upper levels of lower tower in mutual destruction... The analogous mechanism for both towers notwithstanding the greater tilt for WTC2.
    The underlying issue is that none of the AE911 technical leaders understand the actual mechanism of the collapses. Especially at this stage and the transition into "progression". Both Szamboti and Chandler making similar errors.
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 15, 2019
  3. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    I don't think that's a great example. He just says:
  4. Joe Hill

    Joe Hill Member

    Indeed. Core columns would have to buckle, bend, kink, sink, in order for the upper block to tilt. They could still function as fulcrum for observable motion of the upper block while sustaining such failures. Whether it was the core or south wall that initiated vertical failure of the building however, is off topic, and I probably shouldn't have commented on it. :oops:

    The "ripping apart" I referred to was the core structure, not the top block. Based simply on motion of the top block, over, then over and down, then down, in rapid succession, the core structure quickly ripped apart.

    Agreed, and imo, there is nothing more important than initiation, in as tight a frame as is observable.

    Relative to, "and claims that is evidence the core columns had to be cut with cutter charges" (OP), I agree. I considered that axiomatic.
    The video reference was to show that AE uses a view which makes it appear the antenna is sinking as an initial movement, not necessarily the accompanying dialogue.
    Relative to the thread topic however,
    "00:53:11,309 --> 00:53:19,890 before the towers
    00:53:16,349 --> 00:53:24,829 started collapsing from the top the
    00:53:19,890 --> 00:53:27,839 antenna started to fall", confirms AE claims the antenna moved, "fell", before any other part of the building.
    • Agree Agree x 1