Marshall Dudley wrote: > I am going to try to get some better looks when they replay the collapse. I > think the center might have collapsed from the bottom, and the loss of support > at the top once the center support was gone caused the outer shell to collapse > from the top down.
OK, I went to my TiVo and replayed what I had several times. The two main building could have done what was indicated above, or it could have simply collapsed from the top down (although I still don't see how that could happen if properly designed and built). There was a big explosion just preceding one of the tower's collapse that could be heard on the tape I was watching. What exploded? But the video on the 3rd building is VERY interesting. It absolutely collapsed from the bottom. It looks exactly like when they demolish a building. Thing is, it was built conventionally without the outer walls being self supported. And it fell exactly like I have seen lots of others fall from demolition. Why? It makes no sense. If supports gave way, then that part of the building would have fallen, and the rest either stood, or fallen toward the area that failed. But the entire building fell at once, IN ONE PIECE, as if all supports had been blown out at the same time. I am virtually certain that building was blown. I can think of no other way it could have fallen the way it did otherwise. As far as the towers, the jury is still out on that one, could be either way. Marshall -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour <mdev...@eskimo.com>
