Quote:
Originally Posted by Chanda  Irrelevant. If wtc7 collapsed by controlled demolition, then the entire official conspiracy theory is bogus. |
Your entire argument is about how this "expert" says something. He only agrees with you halfway. So either an expert can be wrong or for some reason WTC 7 was a controlled demolition and 1 and 2 weren't.
See the
Structure Magazine article or the NIST report, they both say the final collapse took over 8 seconds for the final collapse.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Structure Mag This sequence of events with the roof elements sinking into the building with an intact facade, suggest an interior failure. An interior failure would explain the appearance of a "controlled" collapse |
Jowenko says that WTC 7
looked like a controlled demolition. Since an interior failure would give that same appearance he is most likely wrong about WTC 7 being a controlled collapse.
Quote:
|
There are several videos online that appear to show demolition charges.
|
They show the charges on WTC 7? I'd like to see those videos.
Quote:
|
The explanation for Silverstein's "pull it" order is unconvincing. According to several sources, there were no firefighters in the building to evacuate. There are numerous witnesses who heard explosions, even a countdown.
|
See Skeptic magazine about the "pull it" order.
Quote:
Question: WTC7 was intentionally "pulled down" with explosives. The building owner himself was quoted as saying he decided to "pull it."
Protech: Building owners do not have authority over emergency personnel at a disaster scene. We have never heard "pull it" used to refer to an explosive demolition. Because of the extensive fires, demolition explosive experts anticipated the collapse of WTC 7. They also personally witnessed it from a few hundred feet away and no one heard detonations.
|
Blanchard is Senior Editor at
ImplosionWorld.com