Dan Minette wrote: > Looking at the contention that the nature of the collapse was > consistent with demolition instead of desctruction by a shock wave > going downwards, we can look at: > > http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/videos/#northtower > > The composit ABC vidio shows pretty clearly that the bottom parts of > the building do not start to fall until the wave of destruction > reaches them. If multiple charges went off, then the collapse would > take place near simultaneously. > > After spending time looking at this, I still cannot see where the > alledged holes in the explaination provided by civil engineers is. > I'd appreciate a description of why the professional explaination > cannot be right. >
Dan, I don't deny it, I question it. I would have an easier time with the way it collapsed if the buildings had toppled onto their neighbors (as awful as that sounds). It is the 3 buildings collapsing straight down that boggles my imagination. As it were......building demolition experts *do* *not* explode all their charges simultaneously in any case, but rather explode the charges so that the collapse is "guided" downward. (And that factoid is from watching a documentary on building demolition I saw back in the 90s). As thing stand, I don't believe in the conspiracy theories, but some aspects of them remain open questions until sufficient answers appear. I just have not seen sufficient evidnce for my particular bugaboo.<G> xponent Splashes Maru rob _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
