Whats distorted is your logic. 2 Planes 3 Buildings fall? Or, can burning desks and paper take down a sky scrapper such as Building 7? Its weird how building 5 and 6 stood standing after the twin towers fell all over them. 5 and 6 looked thrashed and were next to the twins. What about all the accounts of sounds of bombs blasting near the basement? Pancake theory? Core would be intact. What is mis informed is your research of the event.
So,,I guess millions of others and I are all paranoid disillusion.. LOL Ignorant and dumb is no excuse for you sir. [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LO5V2CJpzI]Barry Jennings - 9/11 Early Afternoon ABC7 Interview - YouTube[/ame] [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCdRA09pztM]9/11: Molten Metal at Ground Zero - YouTube[/ame] [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxGB2YoGV-I]FireFighters for 911 Truth.org - Finally - YouTube[/ame]
9/11 FireFighters - THREE Explosions After Plane Hit WTC [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IYlEVCpG_0]9/11 FireFighters - THREE Explosions After Plane Hit WTC - YouTube[/ame] Footage shot September 11, 2001. Just amazing footage of these brave fire fighters, they try to explain 3 bombs going off while still dazed. Compiled Footage of Building 7's Collapse [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWorDrTC0Qg]Compiled Footage of Building 7's Collapse - YouTube[/ame]
Oh, millions of others share these paranoid fantasies? In that case, my mistake, how could I have been so blind? All of these years in the dark, wasted. Finally, a wise and all-knowing voice of reason to spell out the truth. You've lifted the vale of deception, now what do we do?
[quote name='"junkiedays"'] Well, don't quote me on this, but I'm fairly certain they died.[/quote] Omfg I just literally lold and that never happens
This is what a real controlled demolition sounds like [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaBQ3AkRetI]Ocean Tower - Controlled Demolition, Inc. - YouTube[/ame] You'll note the loud booming noises
Sure, I think that's a better explanation than explosives that don't go boom. People like to point out that steel has a high melting point, but it's not like the steel had to be melted, just warped and weakened enough to compromise the building's integrity.
show me another steel framed building collapsing from fire like WTC7 Explain how there was no noise from the demolition of WTC7
we already know it was an inside job freemasons, illuminati, reptilians, airport security, war in iraq, satanism, etc.
Can you show me another building as tall as WTC7 that had a fire raging in it's basement for a comparable amount of time and maintained it's structural integrity? I think there was no noise because it wasn't a demolition. Demolitions generally go boom, you see.
how does a fire bring down a steel building in complete free fall? Look at the layout of the WTC, why did none of the other buildings that were much closer just mysteriously collapse? NIST doesn't say anything about a fire in the basement being the reason for the collapse, not that fire could cause the kind of collapse wherever it happened. This is what NIST says caused the collapse "The fires burned out of control during the afternoon, causing floor beams near column 79 to expand and push a key girder off its seat, triggering the floors to fail around column 79 on Floors 8 to 14. With a loss of lateral support across nine floors, column 79 buckled – pulling the east penthouse and nearby columns down with it. With the buckling of these critical columns, the collapse then progressed east-to-west across the core, ultimately overloading the perimeter support, which buckled between Floors 7 and 17, causing the remaining portion of the building above to fall downward as a single unit. The fires, fueled by office contents, along with the lack of water, were the key reasons for the collapse."
Apparently as much as half the ignorant responses before me. It's funny people say noone heard explosions when there's a few videos of people saying they heard them.
I thought it was supposed to be in the basement of the building but I could be wrong. The point is, uncontrolled fires compromised the building's structural integrity. It's not surprising, the hydrocarbons much of the office contents are made of have very high rates of heat release, and there was a shitload of it. And according to their explaination, the fire didn't melt the steel, it just warped it enough to cause key supports to fail. In general, the simplest explaination is most often the most likely one, so what's simpler, fire warped some steel beams, or they blew it up with explosives that don't go boom?