I understand that to be the case as well. However, Im not willing to reject the notion that a crack, highly trained team of specialists could've rigged WTC7 in an emergency hoping to merely mitigate the damage from its collapse and 'getting lucky.' Far stranger things happen. As a trained firefighter, I can see how it could be done if the situation were dire enough and the team had big enough cojones. ...I don't think it necessary was that dire that WTC7 be demo'd, but I wasn't there.
It would be impossible in a building, 100 stories high, that is being used, every day, for any team to, cut holes in walls, place charges, and run wires without anyone noticing it. and then run the wires to the control center, a coil probably 3 feet thick, and nobody sees them do it. Probably a couple hundred charges per floor. This is getting way to childish.
You ever seen someone running wires in a building? Did you check to make sure they werent planting a bomb?
With the enormity of it, it would be more than just suspicious. And people would have recollected seeing them doing it And it would have been in the way, for all the businesses. You might have a hundred different businesses on a floor. Wires running out the doors, on all the floors.
Yes, and supporters of the official conspiracy theory display groupthink in a big way. True, independent thinkers are rare in this society today. They tend to go separate ways from the easily led mob.
IMO if any building was rigged all 3 towers were. And the twin towers certainly could not have been rigged in one day and definitely not on 9/11. So if all 3 were rigged they were ALL rigged weeks ahead of time. The planning itself could not likely be done in one day for WTC7 alone. The notion that WTC7 was rigged while it was on fire and ON 9/11 while that event was taking place just makes no sense at all.
I asked your friend if there were tunnels connecting the buildings. Naturally he did not answer, so maybe you can. It may be classified, but you would know, because you know everything.
What do psychologists say about physics and people who fail to solve simple physics when they claim to comprehend physics? How do you analyze the physics of a skyscraper without knowing the mass distributions for steel and concrete? The NIST admitted in three places that they could not analyze the movement of the skyscrapers due to the aircraft impacts without mass distribution data. Then they did not do it. Psychology versus Physics! https://psikeyhackr.livejournal.com/1276.html Seven more years of BS!
Thank you, but curiously very little commentary in 7 years. Not what I expected. I can only conclude that lots of people have decided what they do not want to believe and do not want information or ideas that disrupt their comfortable hole in the ground. So the issue becomes the psychology of physicists. LOL
I am not a physicist but a mere mechanical engineer ... even if I knew all the math, I would still have a problem with the circumstances of the collapses ... perhaps you should formally present your findings to other physicists for peer review ...
both of these professions could have keen insight into matters such as "explosions" ... although not licensed in structural engineering, I take issue with NIST not exploring about the foundations of the buildings (seeing as they go quite into the ground) especially regarding how the energy of 1 and 2 coming down should have severely compromised any surrounding structures including 7 ... my understanding of physics suggests that that energy went lateral ...
I asked several of you learned people if there were tunnels connecting the buildings. It could be classified but you people should know.
Yeah like several 4 ton components flew up to 600 feet laterally. Others embedded themselves into adjacent buildings. So then where did all the energy come from that destroyed the twin towers vertically in a matter of seconds if it went lateral? What understanding of physics are you claiming to have? How about simple arithmetic, when you subtract tons of material that went laterally, what's left over?
And how does that energy go laterally, when the official explanation is that office fires, gravity and jetfuel caused the observed damage?
I would say it's YOU who hasn't a clue what YOU're talking about or physics and arithmetic for that matter.
If YOU new anything about physics, you would know what I am talking about ... what I posted has absolutely nothing to do with the cause of the twin tower collapses ... brush up on your reading comprehension ...
Agreed, the twin towers never "collapsed", that would have been a physics and arithmetic IMPOSSIBILITY. The cause of their total destruction in a matter of seconds was not strictly gravity driven so there was no collapse.
in other words ... "I still don't understand what Shinebox is talking about so I will employ more spin" ...
If you don't know what you're talking about why would you expect anyone else to know what you're talking about? Then again, who cares what you're talking about? You bought the OCT lock, stock and barrel so what you're talking about is not relevant to anything about 9/11 anyway (other than to the OCT and other OCT parrots).
