Thermate, WTC collapses

[rhys 0]

Quote

> They never question anything, and swallow practically everything that
>comes out of the TV as 'truth'.

Including things like "Loose Change."

Great rebuttal there Bill!

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

You have shown clearly that you don't understand the strength and designs of these bulidings.

And you're basing this on WHAT experience or knowledge of your own?

Quote

You probably read the FEMA reports (like most) in detail and nothing else since, as these were the first explanations given.

And this is different from you ever since Loose Change came out, how?

Quote

By the time NIST released their report, your opinion was already set in concrete here, even though you didn't have the correct information to base it upon!

See first and second responses.

Quote

Quote

No. They did not collapse all at the same time. They collapsed when they were weakened to the point of failure by impact, fire and seismic loads.

ok, Poindexter, you refuse to see the point but make stupid comments, so I'll re phrase

Individually all 3 buildings had to have had all of thier vertical core colums fail at precicely the same time for the buliding to fail as they did.

He's right, you're wrong - pictures of the initial collapse showing the tipping of the upper floors as the collapse began proves your supposition false.

I'm sure you'll say that these guys (Clicky) are less qualified than your "Physics was my favorite class in high school" expert...which is EXACTLY why nobody takes you seriously in these threads.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[rhys 0]

Quote

Heck, I'm still trying to figure out just WHAT this 'nanocomposite thermate explosive' is and who makes it... Wink

because you don't actually study what it is you try to consider yourself an expert on;

Quote

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has had considerable difficulty determining a politically correct sequence of events for the unprecedented destruction of three World Trade Center (WTC) buildings on 9/11 (Douglas 2006, Ryan 2006, Gourley 2007). But despite a number of variations in NIST’s story, it never considered explosives or pyrotechnic materials in any of its hypotheses. This omission is at odds with several other striking facts; first, the requirement of the national standard for fire investigation (NFPA 921), which calls for testing related to thermite and other pyrotechnics, and second, the extensive experience NIST investigators have with explosive and thermite materials.

source

who developed the stuff;

The USA government of course

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[rhys 0]

Quote

I'm sure you'll say that these guys (Clicky) are less qualified than your "Physics was my favorite class in high school" expert...which is EXACTLY why nobody takes you seriously in these threads.

You mean the guys that "were not paid by the government" but, demoloshed the remains at ground zero, and have taken and accumulated "thousands of photos" from the site, yet have not published them.

Yeah those experts, squeaky clean with no financial connection whatsoever?!??!

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Heck, I'm still trying to figure out just WHAT this 'nanocomposite thermate explosive' is and who makes it... Wink

because you don't actually study what it is you try to consider yourself an expert on;

Quote

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has had considerable difficulty determining a politically correct sequence of events for the unprecedented destruction of three World Trade Center (WTC) buildings on 9/11 (Douglas 2006, Ryan 2006, Gourley 2007). But despite a number of variations in NIST’s story, it never considered explosives or pyrotechnic materials in any of its hypotheses. This omission is at odds with several other striking facts; first, the requirement of the national standard for fire investigation (NFPA 921), which calls for testing related to thermite and other pyrotechnics, and second, the extensive experience NIST investigators have with explosive and thermite materials.

source

Um, sorry - a fellow conspiracy buff is NOT a 'source', nor is it proof that this mystery explosive exists.

Quote

who developed the stuff;

The USA government of course

Prove your cite - show me the manufacturer's website, mention of it someplace ELSE than loosescrews.com... you know, something REAL.

THEN, you can explain how the magical fairies somehow installed all this stuff in the middle of raging fires and debris from the plane crashes, AND got it all to go off with no failures from the heat... all in roughly one hour.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

I'm sure you'll say that these guys (Clicky) are less qualified than your "Physics was my favorite class in high school" expert...which is EXACTLY why nobody takes you seriously in these threads.

You mean the guys that "were not paid by the government" but, demoloshed the remains at ground zero, and have taken and accumulated "thousands of photos" from the site, yet have not published them.

Yeah those experts, squeaky clean with no financial connection whatsoever?!??!

So prove them wrong - I'm sure that between your expertise and that of your 'physics was my favorite class' guy, you'll be able to refute the testimony of a company with over 1000 demolitions under it's belt.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 2,380]

>You probably read the FEMA reports. . . By the time NIST released their report . .

You keep talking about reports. I glanced through them, but my statements have been based on basic physics and the yield properties of steel and concrete, not reports.

>You have proven it is worthless debating with you!

Yet you will undoubtedly continue.

>Individually all 3 buildings had to have had all of thier vertical core colums
>fail at precicely the same time for the buliding to fail as they did.

If you mean "when the failure finally happened it happened suddenly" then yes, I agree. Catastrophic failures usually happen that way. Bridges and buildings rarely collapse over the course of days; usually it's sudden.

Case in point - the I-35 bridge in Minneapolis failed suddenly and catastrophically in seconds in 2007. For the failure to have occurred like that, over a dozen structural members had to fail simultaneously - which they did. Not because they all chose that moment to fail, but because once one member failed, it placed an increased load on the second, which then failed. That placed an even more increased load on the third, which then failed. It then fell nearly symmetrically into the river; the central span went basically straight down at near-freefall speeds.

No evil government agents or thermite involved.

>ok, Poindexter

Why are you so angry? I disagree with you; it's not the end of the world.

[billvon 2,380]

>Great rebuttal there Bill!

That wasn't a rebuttal; I was agreeing with him.

[cumplidor 0]

Quote

Heck, I'm still trying to figure out just WHAT this 'nanocomposite thermate explosive' is and who makes it...

Patent Number 7555986 is for a "Thermite Charge"

Use of thermite in the twin towers is the only plausible explaination as to how every single support on every floor below the area of impact collapsed simultaneously. I've heard the "pancake theory" which claims that the energy being transferred from floor to floor sheared off all support, resulting in no resistance, and that the hundreds of anchor points on each floor simultaneously failed as the top of the building slams into the next floor and the next. Every single support would have to of failed at the same time for this to occur. And this process didn't involve transferring of any energy of any kind- and no resistance? I thought I learned in physics that any resistance will slows objects to some degree?

So the building collapse ended up looking just like a demolition due to this 'shearing' by a trillion ton force...

If you simply watch many different demolitions of high rise structures available on u tube, you may be surprised how similar they all look. Ejecting debris, appearance of building sinking into the ground (all at the same speed), massive dust clouds. It looks so similar to the towers collapse- obviously you have to scale the clouds for the size differences. If I find time, I will put a compilation together of the demolitions, and upload it to u tube, but I doubt you would watch anyway. I also doubt anyone will search for demolition videos on google and see the similarities for themselves.

Both sides of this issue oftentimes cover their ears and go "nah-nah-nah" when the other side is talking. Kind of the way the whole conservative/liberal political discussions go. The other side is ALWAYS wrong- and a bad person to boot! Also kinda reminds me of a small child's initial reaction to when they are told Santa Claus is a lie.

I find it interesting that most of the folks who believe the "Official Version" of 9-11 have NEVER, EVER entertained the idea that it could not have happened that way- 1 perspective. They are usually war supporters and generally fear Muslims and being attacked by the "terrorists".

The people who don't currently believe the "Official Version" of 9-11 in fact initially believed the "Official Version", but over time they examined it from other perspectives and changed what they then believe. True there is alot of weird and conflicting info, but no less than the "Official Investigation" and conflicts I have previously raised. They thought, as our Founding Fathers referred to, the enemy may come from within.

I hear the official explanations of various events, but I have also learned I must be critical of what I am told. And I am terribly critical of the TV. We have movies that can make robots look real and computer programs that conduct thousands of stock trades per minute. I know many people and corporations will lie to cover their ass, their reputation, make a buck or preserve what they got. They don't like being called out and will ridicule, discount, discredit or mock anyone to help support the lie.

Since this describes the typical politician, at all levels of government...

oh well-
you do know what thermite is now right? think it could explain pools of molten iron existing for weeks after the collapse? Molten steel? how hot is that? The patent says thermite can burn at temps from 10k-16k degrees F but typically at 4k. would seem a much more likely fuel for molten metal than chairs and rocket fuel, 3 months after the fact.

I have also heard the explanation of the dripping molten aluminum from the planes was what was seen at the impact site. Since most of the fuel was visibly burned at impact, what was fueling the smelt of the aluminum siding and plane parts causing them to drip?? They said 1800 degree fires were fueling the molten aluminum? I just don't see that, sorry- its just not logical to me but I'm not a Vulcan.

But you say that Thermite didn't exist in 2001? The patent was filed in 2006 right? By golly, your right!

Checking referenced patents reveal patent number 5,698,812 which is for a thermite related destructive device, property of the Army, in 1997. Its the same stuff. burns at 4500F and potentially 3000c. I believe they may have modified patent 5,377,594 (1995) as a weapon for 5698812.

Anyway, I doubt you will be moved by any of this. oh well-

I just gotta ask-
do you-
still believe in Santa Claus or
believe in the "Spirit of Santa"
or do you just not believe in or perpetuate that lie at all? (mind you this question is not referencing Jesus birthday in anyway)

[cumplidor 0]

Quote

> They never question anything, and swallow practically everything that
>comes out of the TV as 'truth'.

Including things like "Loose Change."

Sorry, Loose Change didn't come out on TV as truth. It came out on the internet. You tried to make a funny though, I'll give you that-

Other than nature shows, what truth comes from the TV? Everything that comes out of the TV is classified as entertainment. Its not a library, you cant conduct any research using a TV.

Nowadays, people use the Internet.... You have to sift through some BS, but we all know that the TV is totally full of BS. it is mostly advertising..

[billvon 2,380]

>Sorry, Loose Change didn't come out on TV as truth. It came out on
>the internet.

Ah, well, as long as it was on the Internet!

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Use of thermite in the twin towers is the only plausible explaination as to how every single support on every floor below the area of impact collapsed simultaneously.

oh great, now there's two of them.

Quote

If you simply watch many different demolitions of high rise structures available on u tube, you may be surprised how similar they all look.

And if you looked at a bunch of yoobtube videos of people dropping objects from high places, you'd be surprised at how similarly everything falls straight down.

BEHOLD - the wondrous mystery that is gravity!

Quote

I just gotta ask-
do you-
still believe in Santa Claus or
believe in the "Spirit of Santa"
or do you just not believe in or perpetuate that lie at all? (mind you this question is not referencing Jesus birthday in anyway)

I'd ask the same of you two. Do you believe the South Park explanation of the Easter Bunny? Or do you perpetuate the lie that it's just about chocolate bunnies?

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Use of thermite in the twin towers is the only plausible explaination

Ok, let's say it WAS thermite - not that any evidence of damage from thermite was found, but let's say it was.

Now, prove your theory - you have exactly TWO ways this was accomplished.

1. Some special government hit team planted the explosives after the planes hit.

This requires:
1. Placing the thousands of pounds of explosives
2. Running the miles of wiring
3. Pre-cutting the support members.

4. COMPLETELY DISREGARDING the fact that demo companies ALWAYS work from the ground up. Why count on the top 10 stories of a building having to drop perfectly to start a reaction, when they can do the SAME thing, more reliably and easily, by taking out the BOTTOM two floors?

All that in the time period between the plane hitting the tower and the tower falling.

Multiply that by two and a half to account for both towers and WTC 7.

2. The charges were ALREADY in place (see requirements 1-3, above), which requires the two pilots to be SO highly skilled that they were able to put the planes in EXACTLY the right places to miss the afore-mentioned wire, explosives, etc..... and STILL doesn't account for having to pre-weaken support members, etc.

Both scenarios also require that none of the charges going off early, nothing being affected by the fire (wiring, hello?) - everything has to come off PERFECTLY.

And nobody involved can EVER talk about it, and there can NEVER be any evidence that the newspeople can latch onto.

And, finally, the SAME government that just killed 3000+ of it's OWN citizens is going to balk at taking out the "Loose Change" crew.

I believe the operative phrase here is.... "Bitch, please"....

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Do you have any idea what happens to iron ( the main constituent of steel) at 910 C ? If you don't then you cannot, in any way, carry on any sort of intelligent discussion about the effects of heat on steel with those who study those effects, and teach about them, for a living.

(I'll give you a clue...melting has nothing to do with it. )

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[rivetgeek 0]

Quote

Quote

Heck, I'm still trying to figure out just WHAT this 'nanocomposite thermate explosive' is and who makes it... Wink

because you don't actually study what it is you try to consider yourself an expert on;

Quote

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has had considerable difficulty determining a politically correct sequence of events for the unprecedented destruction of three World Trade Center (WTC) buildings on 9/11 (Douglas 2006, Ryan 2006, Gourley 2007). But despite a number of variations in NIST’s story, it never considered explosives or pyrotechnic materials in any of its hypotheses. This omission is at odds with several other striking facts; first, the requirement of the national standard for fire investigation (NFPA 921), which calls for testing related to thermite and other pyrotechnics, and second, the extensive experience NIST investigators have with explosive and thermite materials.

source

who developed the stuff;

The USA government of course

seriously...your position in indefensible, but you'd do yourself a favor by not using nutjob conspiracy sites as sources...

~Bones Knit, blood clots, glory is forever, and chicks dig scars.~

[sundevil777 93]

Quote

I've heard the "pancake theory" which claims that the energy being transferred from floor to floor sheared off all support, resulting in no resistance, and that the hundreds of anchor points on each floor simultaneously failed as the top of the building slams into the next floor and the next. Every single support would have to of failed at the same time for this to occur. And this process didn't involve transferring of any energy of any kind- and no resistance? I thought I learned in physics that any resistance will slows objects to some degree?

Yes, the lower floors did provide some resistance. Exactly how much do your "experts" think it should have slowed the collapse? So, it collapsed at NEAR freefall speeds, but how far away from a freefall should it have been, by ANALYSIS? At first, the conspiracy theorists were claiming that the collapse was actually FASTER than freefall speeds (somehow the intentional demolition had increased the effect of gravity - very cool by the way...) I will guess that they don't have an answer. That is so much more troublesome than just making the seat-of-the-pants expert engineering judgment that it didn't get slowed enough. Perhaps you think the collapse would hesitate for a half second or so at each floor?

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[cumplidor 0]

Quote

oh great, now there's two of them.

There's many more and the numbers questioning the official story grow daily. When one position chooses to discredit someone else for one of their beliefs and thus relegating all of what they say as irrelevant, what are you really doing? Who is being closed minded? You didn't answer any of my questions yet mock me as a fool, while I treat you respectfully.

Quote

Quote

If you simply watch many different demolitions of high rise structures available on u tube, you may be surprised how similar they all look.

And if you looked at a bunch of yoobtube videos of people dropping objects from high places, you'd be surprised at how similarly everything falls straight down.
BEHOLD - the wondrous mystery that is gravity!

Your response illustrates my point nicely.

While you refused to address or acknowledge the point I was making (similarity in appearance of the collapse of towers/B7 and demolitions of comparable type buildings), you then claim I should watch videos of folks dropping things to see gravity at work. Hm. Is this your way of saying they don't look very similar to you or that you will never watch them and answer me?

Now that you mention it though, if you have watched videos of folks dropping things, the things they fall at just about the same rate as the buildings in the video demolitions.

Which again, also looks very similar to the videos of the building demolitions. They fell at the rate of gravity as well, but those buildings were demolished, unlike the towers... which officially collapsed due to fires

Quote

I'd ask the same of you two. Do you believe the South Park explanation of the Easter Bunny? Or do you perpetuate the lie that it's just about chocolate bunnies?

Sorry can't say. Never seen it. As I said, I hate TV, rarely watch it. But when you answer my question about whether you believe in Santa, Spirit of, or just not perpetuating that lie, I will watch it and get back to you.

[cumplidor 0]

Quote

Ok, let's say it WAS thermite - not that any evidence of damage from thermite was found, but let's say it was.

Now, prove your theory -

I am obviously not a scientist, engineer or the like, so anything related to smelting temps, effects of such like that will be immediately discounted as uneducated. So proof in that manner is not likely.

I do however question what I am told by 'authorities'. Politicians lie to cover their ass. Companies lie to avoid responsibilities for liabilities, and will pay massive settlements to not have to admit wrongdoing. History has shown us this time and time again, government and business have colluded to abuse their slaves. Many of the consumer protections laws, created in the 70s, were because of this fact. The US Constitution was created because of this fact. But that is practically gone now, which is why I question the official version of that horrific day. It is all gone BECAUSE of this event. SO I MUST ASK QUESTIONS-

I will only offer possibilities to explain certain facts, with other facts. Obviously, this is ultimately built upon the concept that our government is not what we they tell us. The concept that profit, power and greed is the ultimate driving force within our government.

Quote

1. Some special government hit team planted the explosives after the planes hit.
This requires:
1. Placing the thousands of pounds of explosives
2. Running the miles of wiring
3. Pre-cutting the support members.

- This is impossible due to the fact that demolition of a building takes massive planning, therefore could not have been planned that morning. Planning could have been done many years ago, when the asbestos problem was discovered. Implementation could be practiced, and a 'government hit team' would be only plausible group able to do this due to connections and materials needed to make it all work

Quote

1. Placing the thousands of pounds of explosives
2. Running the miles of wiring
3. Pre-cutting the support members.

Yes, this could be accomplished by having the 'team' look like maintenance workers, the country wasn't at a heightened state of fear/awareness at that time. Wiring could be explained to most as lan/power/security cabling, and if thermite would have been used to cut the main beams and supports, This would explain pools of molten metal, especially where the core columns were due to the increased amounts needed in those areas.

Placement of thermite cutting charges could be accomplished due to the fact that a W relative led the security management group for the towers.

That could account for the access and placement of demo arguements.

Quote

4. COMPLETELY DISREGARDING the fact that demo companies ALWAYS work from the ground up.

Demo companies have ALWAYS worked and demo'ed buildings MUCH smaller than the towers. Makes sense to me that demo'ing b1&2 from ground up could have TONS of potential problems from building falling over due to failed charges etc. Makes more send to use that mass from the upper floors to take the ones below. I don't recall seeing the upper floors intact when the dust settled? Wouldn't we see that?

Each of the floors were reinforced concrete, so all that concrete would fall uniformly distributing weight evenly. when the upper floors fell and hit the floor, all that force would be distributed evenly to that next floor, right?

Quote

All that in the time period between the plane hitting the tower and the tower falling.

THAT'S where the problem comes in. Is the core belief that to demolish the buildings, the demo charges would have been placed after the plane hit. I will agree that is impossible.

I beleive our core difference on this issue is that you appear to completely trust your government and I don't?

Quote

And, finally, the SAME government that just killed 3000+ of it's OWN citizens is going to balk at taking out the "Loose Change" crew.

They have killed their own citizens many times before to reach some end goal, so why not now. Look at what was at stake! The "Patriot" Act- Be wary that the entire US Constitution is basically nullified at this point and yes, they can take anyone of us out at any time. (ends justifies the means, you know) . We need people demanding more truth, not defending deception

I have to go-

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

SO I MUST ASK QUESTIONS

And you do - and when you get told that IT'S NOT FRIGGING POSSIBLE in any stretch of the imagination, you make this reply:

Quote

is that you appear to completely trust your government and I don't

And then you ask WHY you get laughed at? C'mon, dude...re-read what you've written.

Ok... so you're going with the 'pre-planted' scenario.

Now, those novice pilots have to be good enough to hit exactly on the right floor of the towers... at 500+ MPH. None of the explosives can be disturbed or set off by the impact or fire. The columns still have to be cut - can't do that ahead of time.

So, more questions:

Where's the master board? Why haven't ANY of the thousands of people that would have to be involved not come forward?

And, most importantly (and again) -

WHY would a government that had just killed 3000+ of it's own citizens let the "Loose Change" people live once they started snooping?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[sundevil777 93]

Quote

While you refused to address or acknowledge the point I was making (similarity in appearance of the collapse of towers/B7 and demolitions of comparable type buildings), you then claim I should watch videos of folks dropping things to see gravity at work. Hm. Is this your way of saying they don't look very similar to you or that you will never watch them and answer me?

You haven't addressed my question about how fast the buildings should have fallen, but I will address this question of yours (similarity to controlled demolitions). You say because it looks so similar, that the conclusion it was a controlled demolition (CD) is reasonable. I say that in order to make that conclusion, you should have examples of collapses that even you would accept as not a CD. How many examples of high rise collapses have you witnessed that you would accept were not a CD (of course not including the WTC)? Because all that you have to compare against is when they are a CD, then how do you know what the WTC collapse should have looked like? You have nothing to compare it to, so your conclusion is without justification, similar to the fact that you don't know how much the collapse should have been slowed by the floors below the level of failure. You got nothing. You make seat-of-your-pants engineering judgements that are worthless. I have a mechanical engineering degree, designed cars and airplanes for 18 years. That doesn't make me a civil engineering expert, but it sure makes me more likely to spot bullshit when I see it than the average person, especially compared to you.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[sundevil777 93]

Quote

I don't recall seeing the upper floors intact when the dust settled? Wouldn't we see that?

NO, Absolutely NOT!

Your ability to make that conclusion shows that you don't have what it takes to understand this stuff.

Quote

Each of the floors were reinforced concrete, so all that concrete would fall uniformly distributing weight evenly. when the upper floors fell and hit the floor, all that force would be distributed evenly to that next floor, right?

WHAT? You conclude that since they are reinforced concrete, the upper floors would land evenly on the lower floors, and because of that we should conclude that loads would be tolerable? Both parts of that are completely wrong? I can tell that physics was not your favorite class. Please stop pretending to be able to analyze this stuff.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[DJL 232]

Quote

WHY would a government that had just killed 3000+ of it's own citizens let the "Loose Change" people live once they started snooping?

The Truth is Out There

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I am obviously not a scientist, engineer or the like, so anything related to smelting temps, effects of such like that will be immediately discounted as uneducated. So proof in that manner is not likely.

In other words, nothing presented to you will be accepted as evidence, because you're not equipped to examine it. So you'll stick with your gut distrust of The Man.

Questioning your government is healthy. Skepticism is healthy. But at some point reason must also enter the equation.

No one is going to engage you with any level of effort because 1) it's been done repeatedly already here with no progress and 2) it's somewhat disrespectful to the dead.

Feel free to argue that the US brought this upon itself, but if you want to continue the fantasy that Bushco or Clinton/Bushco did, you have to address the virtual impossibility of planning and executing this conspiracy without any one talking. And no one has.

[billvon 2,380]

> The concept that profit, power and greed is the ultimate driving force
> within our government.

EXACTLY! If some member of the government - a disguntled employee, perhaps - produced proof that Bush did this, all that would be his. Profit and greed? He'd make millions, be an instant hero, and have his name on the cover of every magazine from here to China.

And yet none of that happened. Either everyone in the government is 100% trustworthy, and cannot be bought for any price, or there's a hole in your theory.

> I don't recall seeing the upper floors intact when the dust settled?
>Wouldn't we see that?

No. Building segments are not designed to fall hundreds of feet and land intact. Most architects do not design for that possibility.

>Each of the floors were reinforced concrete, so all that concrete would fall
>uniformly distributing weight evenly. when the upper floors fell and hit the
>floor, all that force would be distributed evenly to that next floor, right?

If there were no additional structure other than the floors - yes. However, there is a lot of additional structure, so the loading would be very far from even.

[rhys 0]

Quote

I say that in order to make that conclusion, you should have examples of collapses that even you would accept as not a CD. How many examples of high rise collapses have you witnessed that you would accept were not a CD (of course not including the WTC)? Because all that you have to compare against is when they are a CD, then how do you know what the WTC collapse should have looked like?

or another way to look at it is to compare to controlled demolitions that did not work properly;

like this one

or this one

or this one

then watch the WTC 1 an 2 falling down and ask why the top sections of both of these building turned to dust with large sections of steel columns being fired laterally out of them.

the buliding in these links will not have been made to anywhere near the standards of the WTC complex.

Also ask yourself, If i am so sure that the buildings could fall down on thier own accord, after the plane impacts, then why should such a large amount on explosives be needed using the same rationale?

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix