Quote:
Originally Posted by hershie
Why does your mind make you ignore obvious evidence about what really happened to Building 7 and harp on the fire angle. Is that being honest and objective. I mean just look under the collapse section of this wikipedia page - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center - and all the footnotes provided. Yet you still blather about fire. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by hershie
MediaGuy, what, no love or time to look at this obvious and rational explanation for building 7 - http://debunking911.com/pull.htm - or are you too busy cherry-picking what to talk about that supports your cause. |
I read those. I don't blather about fire. No one blathers about WTC7 - what caused it to come down straight and purfect.
Neither commission reports or NIST or FEMA talk about the collapse. They talk about what "lead" to it.
If there was such damage on the south face, why did it not fall backwards. Have you seen the footage? It's near one of the most perfect demolitions recorded. Ever.
Every truss, beam and girder would have to fail absolutely and simultaneously for it to go down the way it did. No one addresses this.
Actual physical damage leading to collapse would have lead to toppling determined by the measure of the damage. That didn't happen. It went down like a house of cards, with nothing but air inside apparently.