Wow, so much bullshit since I last checked here.
If they are not a bunch of corrupt bastards, why
didn't they even check to see if explosives were used? What moron of a scientist would predetermine explosives were not used before even initiating investingations.
Because of 2 major problems with the demolition hypothesis. Firstly:
They could not figure out any practical method for remotely detonating thermite and holding it in place with the steel so that the steel is destroyed. Even truthers have never shown how this is supposed to be possible.
Secondly, we have to lack of sounds and lack of blown out windows which rule out conventional demolition explosives.
Just because some idiot described the steel as licorice doesn't mean he had the slightest bit of evidence to support the statement. People who chose to believe that the planes could bring the buildings down that fast had to rationalize it after their destruction. They chose to refuse to consider the possibility that anything else was involved.
Search the NCSTAR1 report. Specify any evidence for the fire being over 600 deg C. How can 600 deg C turn steel into licorice in less than 2 hours?
psik
Steel was inspected and Headspin gave us all an url which unwittingly proved him false. The expert investigated the steel and told us how it was warped and twisted which would have been in keeping with fire in temperatures stated by NIST. Office fires can and do reach temperatures up to 1832F, and with the aircraft piling up combustable materials to one area, it burned verociously at this temperature.
More then 520 Architects and Engineers quetion or downright disagree with your view. You may want to take a look at their reasoning:
http://www.ae911truth.org/ (it's on the right hand side of the page).
That is not a scientific arena any more than a creationist website that has the names of people with Ph.D's. They have to pass peer-review beyond their biased website.
Doesn't a skyscraper have to support its own weight?
Yes, assuming all the peices are connected.
Doesn't it have to withstand the lateral forces of the wind of 100+ mph?
What does this have to do with impact from a 500 mph 767 or fire at 1800 degrees?
So for a straight down gravitational collapse to occur as a result of an airliner impact and fire doesn't the portion above the impact have to progressively crush and destroy everything beneath? So to analyze this supposed event don't we need to know the quantity of steel and concrete on every level as it had to be hit and destroyed in sequence?
Haven't you watched the video on YouTube of a 10 story apartment building collapsing to its footprint at near free fall speed due to fire alone?
So why don't we have a table specifying the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE on every level of the building after SEVEN YEARS. This simple physics problem should have been settled in less than a year but all of the EXPERTS should have admitted that information was necessary.
I'm pretty sure that information is already out there?
We know about the perimeter colums, the core columns (which weren't part on the initial collapse), the floor trusses, the thickness of concrete etc.
The entire? This is incorrect because only the dumb precent of these communities say otherwise. Real scientists who do not buy into all of that science fiction know that a fire definitely did not cause WTC7 to collapse.
Then how come I can not find any disagreement in the scientific community about anything regarding the WTC? Sure you can point to conspiracy theory websites, but I'm talking about science.
The science is of the matter is the only thing that counts. Who cares what any scientists opinion is. Show me some actual scientific fact. The fact is, that building was demolished.
Wow, halt the front page!
Oh wait, it's a fact even though no explosions were seen or heard? Or that even though people in the clean up operation had experience cleaning up demolished buildings, they found no remnants of any kind of demolition materials?
Buildings that are demolished typically go
BOOM... which didn't happen on 9/11.
Even if the whole scientific community were to say it did or didn't collapse because of fire, they still need facts to back it up. Because all the facts point to demolition, there is no reason to believe that some fairies came, and collapsed it just as much as there is no reason to believe a fire broke out to collapse it.
If the facts pointed to demolition, science would say it was a demolition. They are not saying it was a demolition. It's only morons like you say that. Mostly men in their 20's with no qualifications in anything.
