Assertion, assertion, assertion.... Come back when you can support your claims. The industry trade mag, ImplosionWorld say this was not a controlled demolition. Are they lying too? - - - Updated - - - And how do you not understand, the impacted floor were no longer able to supported the floors above and the collapse initiated...and the lower floor could not stop that momentum of the mass above.
This sort of answer begs for speculation about HOW it was done when we do not as yet have it properly defined as to exactly what was done.
I thought we were discussing WTC7 you started in quoting the explanation of how the towers fell. for WTC7 its Column 79 failing and causing total failure from there, only problem is that NIST misrepresented the structural details for Column 79 ....
Discussing specifics causes the other side a great deal of pain, apparently. NIST misrepresented other columns by simply NOT even saying they were in the original design to begin with. (not just 79).
I thought the Dr. William Pepper esq letter about the NIST misrepresentation of Column 79 was famous enough that there wasn't any need for providing any link to it.
To attempt to address the original issue of this thread, there are box columns that appear intact, that is conforming to their original shape and having bolt holes that are still round, and this was the product of catastrophic structural failure? what happened to the bolts? There are also pictures of near ground level columns that are angle cut and there is much debate as to when the pix was taken, during the clean-up process? or right after the "collapse"? makes a difference. again Voids of INFORMATION. The very fact of total destruction of the towers & 7 is compelling evidence, however there are people who attempt to dismiss it, however, why should there be "total collapse was inevitable ... after collapse initiation ... " why does anybody buy this crap? total collapse inevitable? sez who? and WHY?
Now whose conflating the collapse of WTC 1&2 with 7? Fact is, you truthers have nothing to offer but questions...most, nonsensical...and what you fail to understand is, question are not proof. Oh, you comment regarding the "angle cut steel" there is no debate, that was post-collapse...and if you were honest enough, you would know that. Why do "truthers" resort to lying?
He was also a principal player with the WTC's security. He got out just as soon as he had things 'in place' .
You have zero proof of that...Besides,securacom's dealings with thr WTC ended in 1998,regardless of Marvin 'Bush
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070831135134AABmBJ0 More of Marvin's principality of the WTCs here: https://www.commondreams.org/views03/0204-06.htm
Full of lies and half truths...Yeah I'd say it was bogus,what really got me though,Is the idiotic claim that the bomb sniffing dogs had been removed prior to 9/11
My point here is about the fact that people say the picture of the angle cut steel was ( post collapse ) ( post clean-up ) however, can any assertion of this be DOCUMENTED? it would be very simple if any given photographer made detailed notes as in the time & location for any given pix, so it could be known if said pix was taken right after the collapse, or days later. Why is 9/11 so poorly documented?
Poorly documented? Are you on crack? The event was perhaps, the most documented event of this nature in modern history. Could it be, perhaps, your making another assertion. There are literally thousands of photos, hundreds of videos....hundreds of eyewitness account. Poorly documented?...yeah, no.
Photos, most certainly, and lots of them however, for any given photo, can it be known as to exactly when & where said pix was shot? that is the DOCUMENTATION part.
exactly where do you recommend that I look I have tried to find information on pictures of ground zero and so far have found nothing of value. The famous pix showing first responders in the foreground and in the background angle cut columns, can anybody say for certain exactly when this pix was taken?
LOLOL.. the angle of cut steel? Your experts are liars. Do you think rescue operations allowed wandering photographers access to the site?
