James Allen wrote:
KP50 first of all you make a big error when you say "replicate the free fall of a demolition" free fall is not a feature of a controlled demolition of a building, so the idea that because there was free fall, means it was a CD is rubbish, as demonstrated here:
Your other mistake is this: "And that WTC7 looked like a demolition. Explain to me how fire can imitate demolition because frankly, I think it is impossible." the ONLY similarity is that they were both gravity driven collapses, everything else is different. The lack of explosions and flashes, how the collapse started (east penthouse), the building falling outside of it's own footprint, an severely damaging 2 other buildings.
Truthers like to claim a uniform symmetrical collapse that looks nothing like the NIST model, however when evidence comes out to the contrary, it is ignored, and they carry on repeating what is proven wrong!
Hmm. I don't think this thread should end like this.
The first Youtube video is made by a guy that is deliberately setting out to say CD does not produce freefall and concentrates on an (interesting) video about a large demolition job in Texas which was brought down with care and standard explosives - the most economical way of doing things.
He makes the point that you "can't trick gravity".
I think I've already made the main points already:
- the texas demolition job was done with care
- the texas demolition job was done economically
- the texas demolition job was done with standard RDX explosives
Assuming a CD conspiracy...
- WTC7 was most likely that it was supposed to fail at same time as South Tower collapse (hence Barry Jennings testimony, news reports of its collapse etc)
- Since it didn't come down at that point then the collapse was "hidden" - at least in the UK - live satellite coverage was cut minutes before the collapse and just after Jane Standley's famous announcement of its collapse
- Money was not an object in bringing down the building - hence it could have used exotic explosives (such as IH-135 or other energetic nano-composite) using radio controlled detonation devices.
- The collapse of WTC7 was symmetric where it mattered - it did not fall into the building either side. It was slightly screwed in the other axis - it did fall back into the debris of the south tower. Hence the (provable) claims that the tower collapse was symmetric.
- Pools of molten steel were found under WTC 1, 2 and 7. This molten metal is well reported and could even be seen coming from a corner of the South Tower.
- NIST has failed to explain or investigate these points. Instead it claims from a single scenario (a bomb attached to their magic beam - their supposed collapse point) that explosives could not have been used and back this by an assertion that a loud sound would have been heard. US Fireman's Fire Investigation handbook - their 101 - is that lack of explosive sounds should not preclude an investigation into "explosive or fire accelerants".
- NIST subsequently released videos (under FOIA) of the WTC7 collapse with the sound track removed!
- NIST will not release its computer models or data under FOIA (and states that there would be "a risk to public safety" to do so).
Freefall of WTC7 has yet to be explained.
You can't fool gravity unless you want to take the whole building into a Vomit Comet and drop out of the sky. That would make a good picture...
The support of the whole building had to have been simultaneously removed for more than 8 stories by some mechanism. There is no known natural mechanism to do this.
Hence it could have ONLY have been a man-made deliberate act to take this building down.
As a short hand, this is described as "Controlled Demolition"...
As Danny Jowenko would say "Absolutely"
http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-secti ... wenko.html